Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/459/2022 on 7 March, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
Second Bail Application No. 2 of 2024
In
CRLA No. 459 of 2022
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Abhishek Verma (through V.C.) and Ms.
Aishwarya Thapliyal, learned counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned Assistant Government
Advocate for the State.
3. This is an admitted appeal, admitted on
11.11.2022. Trial court record were summoned and
received and paper book is also supplied to the learned
counsel for the parties.
4. Present appellant “Rajesh” was convicted by
judgment and order dated 07.09.2022/ 09.09.2022
passed by Special Judge, POCSO Act / FTSC,
Haridwar in Special Sessions Trial No. 78 of 2019 ,
Police Station – Kankhal, District – Haridwar whereby
appellant has been convicted under Section 376 (da),
376 (2) (n) and 506 IPC and under Section 5 (l), (j) II / 6
POCSO Act and the maximum sentence awarded is 10
years rigorous imprisonment and maximum fine of Rs.
50,000.
5. Heard on second bail application. First bail
application was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.11.2022
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant was not on bail during trial and he was
arrested on 05.03.2019 and since then he is in jail and
appellant has no previous criminal history and he has
already served more than six years of sentence,
therefore, he may be released on bail.
7. On the other side, learned AGA for the State has
not disputed this fact that the appellant has no
previous criminal history. He further submits that as
per custody certificate dated 06.03.2025, appellant has
completed 6 years of sentence without remission and 6
years 8 months 9 months sentence with remission as on
06.03.2025.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this
Court is of the view that since appellant has completed
6 years of sentence without remission and 6 years 8
months 9 months sentence with remission as on
06.03.2025 and is in long incarceration, therefore, this
Court is of the view that appellant deserves for bail.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, second bail application is allowed.
9. Let appellant – Rajesh be released on bail during
the pendency of the instant appeal, on furnishing his
personal bond and two sureties, each of the like
amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
10. Realization of the fine shall also remain
suspended.
11. List this appeal for final hearing in due course
along with connected appeal.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
07.03.2025
SKS