[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1904/2025 on 13 February, 2026
2026:UHC:931
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1/1904/2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Vikas Anand and Ms. Gunjan
Kanwal, learned counsel for the
applicant.
2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A.
for the State.
3. Applicant-Paras Bisht, who is in
judicial custody in connection with Case
Crime/F.I.R. No.60 of 2025, registered
under Sections 65, 351(1), 352 B.N.S.
and 5(m) & 6 of Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) at
Police Station Kaladhungi, District
Naintial has sought his release on bail.
4. Heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material
available on record.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the complainant, who is the
mother of the alleged victim, lodged the
First Information Report alleging that on
the date of the incident the applicant
forcibly entered her house when her
minor daughter, aged about 16 years,
was alone at home. It is alleged that the
applicant assaulted the victim,
attempted to undress her, gagged her
mouth and tried to strangulate her when
she raised an alarm. On hearing her
cries, her nephew allegedly arrived at the
spot, whereafter the applicant fled. It is
further alleged that when the
complainant later confronted the
applicant at his residence, he abused her
and extended threats to kill her. On the
2026:UHC:931
basis of the said allegations, after
completion of investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted charge-
sheet against the applicant under
Sections 65, 351(1) and 352 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Sections 5(m) and 6 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant
further submits that the entire
prosecution case, as set out in the F.I.R.,
is false, concocted and motivated. It is
contended that there is no allegation of
rape in the F.I.R., nor does the medical
examination report disclose any evidence
suggestive of sexual assault. It is further
submitted that in her initial statement
recorded during investigation, the victim
did not level any allegation of rape.
However, at a later stage, when her
statement was recorded before the trial
court, she materially improved her
version and for the first time alleged an
incident purportedly occurring in the
year 2023, which was neither mentioned
in the F.I.R. nor disclosed to her family
members or any authority at any earlier
point of time.
7. It is further argued that the
allegations of rape and sexual assault
have been falsely introduced due to prior
enmity; that, an altercation had taken
place between the applicant and his
cousin brother on 14.05.2025, and in
order to settle personal scores, the
present false case has been foisted upon
the applicant. It is submitted that prior
to the said date, no F.I.R. or complaint
alleging rape had ever been lodged, nor
were such allegations made in the
statement recorded under Section 181
2026:UHC:931
B.N.S. It is contended that on the date of
the alleged occurrence no untoward
incident took place. The victim's cousin
brother is stated to have longstanding
enmity with the applicant's family and
had previously quarrelled with and
threatened to falsely implicate the
applicant in a criminal case. It is further
submitted that the victim's statement
itself indicates that she was compelled to
depose under the influence of her mother
and cousin brother.
8. Learned counsel submits that the
applicant is innocent and has been
falsely implicated; that, the applicant is
in judicial custody since 17.05.2025 and
has no previous criminal antecedents.
The applicant is a young man aged about
20 years and was employed in a private
job; prolonged incarceration would
seriously prejudice his future prospects.
It is further submitted that the
investigation has been completed and
charge-sheet has already been filed;
therefore, there is no likelihood of
tampering with the evidence. The
applicant is a permanent resident of
District Nainital and there is no
possibility of his absconding or misusing
the liberty of bail. Hence, he deserves to
be enlarged on bail.
9. Per contra, learned State counsel
vehemently opposes the bail application
on the ground that the allegations in the
F.I.R. are serious in nature. However, he
fairly concedes that there are certain
contradictions in the statements of the
victim and that the applicant has been in
custody since 17.05.2025.
10. Having considered the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the
parties, perused the record, and without
2026:UHC:931
expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, this Court finds it to be a fit
case for granting bail.
11. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed.
12. Let the applicant be released on
bail, subject to furnishing a personal
bond and two reliable sureties each of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the
court concerned.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
13.02.2026
Mamta
2026:UHC:931
