BA1/2322/2025
2026 Latest Caselaw 2148 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/2322/2025 on 19 March, 2026

                                                                  2026:UHC:1921
              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions               COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               BA1 No.2322 of 2026
                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Ankit Bisht and Ms. Ketki Chhaya Chaudhary, Advocates for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant seeking regular bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.430 of 2024, under Section 127(2), 351, 65(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Raipur, District Dehradun.

3. An F.I.R. came to be registered at the instance of the brother of the prosecutrix (aged 13 years), wherein it was alleged that the applicant had sexually assaulted the prosecutrix after wrongfully confining her in his room for approximately three hours. Upon completion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in judicial custody since 30.11.2024. Reliance is placed on the medical examination report of the prosecutrix, which records the absence of any external or internal injuries, with the hymen found intact. Further, the statement of the examining doctor explicitly rules out any sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. As regards the age of the prosecutrix alleged as 13 years in the complaint, the same stands belied by her brother's statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he has stated his own age as 32 years and that he got married in 2022; the prosecutrix, in her statement, has claimed to be 8 years younger than her brother, 2026:UHC:1921 thereby placing her age at approximately 23-24 years at the time of the alleged incident. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the same and will furnish the bail surety as per the satisfaction of this Court.

5. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant has made out a prima facie case for grant of bail. The medical examination report does not support the prosecution version, as no external or internal injuries were found and the hymen was intact, with the doctor opining that no sexual intercourse had taken place. There also appears to be a material inconsistency regarding the age of the prosecutrix, which casts doubt on the prosecution story at this stage. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.11.2024 and the trial is likely to take time. There is no material to suggest that the applicant would tamper with evidence or influence witnesses if enlarged on bail.

7. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant, namely, Kapil Kumar be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

(Alok Mahra, J.) 19.03.2026 Arpan

ARPAN

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365 445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e,

JAISWAL postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454 C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.03.19 15:01:18 +05'30'