Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1541/2025 of BAGESH Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 14 August 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1541/2025 Bagesh --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Mayank Joshi, learned
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/1541/2025
Bagesh
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Mr. Mayank Joshi, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Vijay Khanduri, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. The instant bail application is moved on behalf of the applicant ‘Bagesh’ S/o Balveer for seeking regular bail in reference to First Information Report dated 10.04.2024 bearing FIR No. 0134 of 2024 P.S. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, wherein, the present applicant along with one Bharat have been implicated for the offences punishable under sections 363, 377 of IPC r/w section 5/6 of POCSO Act.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and even otherwise there is no substantial progress in the trial since out of in total 15 prosecution witnesses uptill date only 6 witnesses have been examined, therefore, there is no any possibility that trial would be expedited soon.
5. He further submits that the applicant at the time of incident was 19 years and the victim was 7 years 4 months male child, the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2024 and already suffered incarceration of more than 2 years and, therefore, be released on bail.
6. On the other side, learned A.G.A. have not disputed that uptill date out of 15 prosecution witnesses only 6 witnesses have been examined and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 10.04.2024 and he also admits that at the time of incident the applicant was 19 years and was of a tender age.
7. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant already suffered incarceration of more than 2 years since he is languishing in jail from 10.04.2024 and at the time of incident he was 19 years and, as such, was of a tender age and there is no substantial progress in the trial as out of in total 15 prosecution witnesses uptill date only 6 witnesses have been examined, this court is of the view that the applicant deserve for bail.
8. Apart from this, as apprised, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, therefore, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant ‘Bagesh’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 14.08.2026 PR