Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/1831/2025 of JAID Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 17 June 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010154212025 2026:UHC:5007 BA1 No.1831 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mrs. Rangoli
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports,
orders or
proceedings
or directions
and
Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010154212025
2026:UHC:5007
BA1 No.1831 of 2025
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. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Present bail application is filed by the applicant Jaid, S/o Nafees, praying for regular bail in reference to first information report dated 12.04.2025 bearing Case Crime No.127 of 2025 wherein he has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 137(2), 64(2)(m) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Section 3(A), 4, 51 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and infact, he known to victim since last one year through Instagram; they made friends and were in love, which she has admitted before the doctor, who conducted the medical examination. He submits that the applicant at the time of incident was of tender age of 20 years and the victim at that time was 16 years, therefore, both of them were of tender age and were in love. He submits that charge sheet has already been filed; trial has already been commenced and uptill date four prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon. He further submits that present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.06.2025 and he has no criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has not disputed that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.06.2025 and the trial has already been commenced. She also has not disputed the statement of the victim as given during the medical examination to the doctor, which reveals that she was in love with the present applicant.
6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the trial has already commenced and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 02.06.2025 and in fact, at the time of incident the applicant was of tender age of 20 years and the victim was also of 16 years though the victim was minor at the time of incident but they were in love, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant-Jaid, S/o Nafees, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.06.2026 Arti