Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/651/2026 of MANOJ PAL Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 17 July 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010064452026 2026:UHC:5983 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/651/2026 Manoj Pal --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Mr. D.N. Sharma,
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.
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010064452026
2026:UHC:5983 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/651/2026 Manoj Pal
--Applicant Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Mr. D.N. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma, learned AGA for the State.
3. Present applicant-Manoj Pal, S/o Shri Bhukan Singh is praying for bail in reference to a First Information Report dated 13.11.2025 bearing FIR No.532 of 2025, P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which was lodged against the unknown persons for the offence punishable under Section 140(3) of BNS, 2023.
4. In this FIR during investigation, the applicant was arrested and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64 of BNS, 2023 read with Section 5/6 of POCSO Act.
5. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated, which is evident from the fact that the victim herself refused to go for the medical examination and there is no any scientific evidence with regard to the sexual assault. He further submits that even the victim was examined as PW1 wherein she has not support the case of the prosecution rather she submits that she likes the present applicant but her maternal uncle was not agreed for their marriage and denied about any sexual assault and infact applicant advised her to go home. He further submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and present applicant is languishing in jail since 19.11.2025.
6. On the other hand, Mrs. Meenakshi Sharma, learned AGA has not disputed that the victim in her statement has not support the case of the prosecution and further she refused to go for medical examination and the charge sheet has already been filed and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents.
7. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that charge sheet has already been filed and applicant is languishing in jail since 19.11.2025 and has no criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
9. Let the present applicant-“Manoj Pal” be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.07.2026 Arti