Mukesh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1739 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Mukesh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 March, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                IA No.1 of 2023 For Bail Application
                                 In
            Criminal Jail Appeal No. 125 of 2023

Mukesh                                                     ...... Appellant

                                     Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                                      ..... Respondent

Present:
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the appellant, through video conferencing.
Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State.

Coram:        Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The instant appeal has been preferred against

judgment and order dated 31.07.2023 and 01.08.2023, passed in

Special Sessions Trial No.30 of 2022, State Vs. Mukesh, by the

court of Special Sessions Judge (POCSO Act)/District and

Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, District Chamoli. By it, the

appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section

376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(l)/6 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. Heard.

3. Admit.

4. Let call for the LCR.

5. Once LCR is received, paper books be prepared

and provided to learned counsel for the parties, as per rules.

6. List in due course for final hearing.

7. Heard on First Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2023

8. According to the FIR, the appellant enticed the

victim, a young girl, on 23.03.2022, in the midnight. A search was

made, but she could not be traced. Thereafter, the FIR was lodged.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant and the victim both were in romantic relationship; this

is what the victim has stated in her statement given in the police

station and during trial; the appellant was also a young boy of 21

years at the time of incident; they both solemnized marriage also.

10. This fact is not disputed by learned State Counsel.

11. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case, we are of the view that it is a case in which the execution

of sentence should be suspended and the appellant be enlarged

on bail.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. The sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeal.

14. The appellant be released on bail during the

pendency of the appeal on his executing a personal bond and

furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the

satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Siddhartha Sah, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 10.03.2026

Ravi Bisht