Ajeet Negi v. State of Uttarakhand

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

BA1/2066/2025

Ajeet Negi --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent

Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

¶1Mr. Lalit Sharma and Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant.

¶2Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3The present applicant 'Ajeet Negi' S/o Shri Virendra Singh Negi is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated

08.01.2025 bearing FIR No. 03 of 2025 P.S. Chamba, District Tehri Garhwal, wherein, the present applicant is implicated for the offences punishable under sections 351(3), 64(1) of BNS, 2023 r/w sections 11(ii)/12, 11(v)/12 of POCSO Act and section 66E, 67B of I.T. Act, 2000, P.S. Chamba, District Tehri Garhwal.

¶4It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant at the time of incident was 18 and ½ years old and was pursuing studies in 12th Standard and at that time the victim was also 15 and ½ years old and both of them known to each other since more than one year and were in talking terms through mobile. He submits that the alleged incident as shown was occurred in August, 2024 and thereafter in January, 2025 victim apprise to her mother then the FIR was lodged and then medical was done on 09.01.2025 and sample was also sent for Forensic Analysis but no definite opinion has been given. He submits that in reference to the incident in August, 2024 the FIR was lodged at a belated stage i.e on

08.01.2025 and thereafter the medical was done and the hymen was found to be torn though the

Doctor have not give any opinion with regard to the sexual assault and even there is no injury mark on the body of the victim. He submits that infact the applicant and the victim were known to each other and were in love and both of them were of a tender age at the time of alleged incident though the victim was minor, aged about 15 and ½ years but at the time of incident the applicant was also of 18 and ½ years old. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and the charge-sheet has already been filed and, as such, there is need for further custodial interrogation. In addition to this, he also submits that alleged viral video also sent for forensic analysis, however as per FSL report dated

07.11.2025 no such video was shown on any other social media platform and the video were extracted from whatsapp business application data but was not found in Whatsapp application chats, therefore, no opinion has been given regarding origin of video.

¶5Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently oppose the bail application by submitting that admittedly the victim at the time of incident was minor and hymen is also found to be torn though she fairly submits that doctor has not give a definite opinion with regard to the sexual assault, however, after collecting all credible evidence the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶6After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and after gone through the FIR and the Doctor's report as well as FSL report dated 07.11.2025 and 12.08.2025, this court is of the view that since the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, the present applicant was of tender age at the time of incident and is languishing in jail since 09.01.2025, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.

¶7Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant 'Ajeet Negi' be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction

of the court concerned.

¶9It is made clear that after being released on bail the applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment and shall surrender his passport, if any, within three days of his release in the trial court.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

22.07.2026 PR