Dismissed¶7

Gajendra Alias Ganesh v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC2 Apr 2025BA1/1304/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand High Court bail rejection; Judge Ashish Naithani; BA 1st No.1304 of 2024; applicant Gajendra @ Ganesh; FIR No.710 of 2023, Police Station Rudarpur, Udham Singh Nagar; offences under Sections 363, 376, 506 IPC and Sections 5/6 POCSO Act; rape of minor girl; victim's statements under Sections 161/164 CrPC; five-month pregnancy per medical documents; custody since 25.12.2023; no case for bail made out; application rejected on 02.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the applicant had raped the minor girl, the Court held that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. ¶6

Gajendra Alias Ganesh Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

SL. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:2484
			BA 1^stNo.1304 of 2024 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the applicant.
			2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Gajendra @ Ganesh, S/o Dharmveer, resident of Durga Colony, Shukla Farm, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The applicant is presently in judicial custody in connection with FIR No.710 of 2023, registered at Police Station Rudarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, under Sections 363, 376 and 506 of IPC and under Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act. He has sought his release on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present matter. He further submits that applicant has never made any physical relations with the victim, and the victim has not been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 25.12.2023. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel vehemently opposes the bail application of the applicant on the ground that the applicant had raped the minor girl, and he has made physical relations with the victim, due to which, the victim got

¶2

pregnant. He further states that the applicant relations with the minor girl on regular basis. recorded under Section 161 and 164 of CrPC, stated that the applicant had raped her, and du got pregnant. According to the medical docum was five month pregnant.	made phys The statem the victim e to which ents, the vi	ical ents had she ctim
6. Considering the overall facts and circu case, and the fact that the applicant had raped Court is of the view that the applicant has not for bail.	mstances of minor girl, made out a	the this case
7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejec	ted.
(Ashish	Naithani,	J)
02.04 Nitesh/	.2025

Gajendra Alias Ganesh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Alias Ganesh v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamaluddin Vs State of Uttarakhand

Manjeet Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Manish Vs State of Uttarakhand

Aaditya Vs State of Uttarakhand

Hariya Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shubham Alias Buddhu Vs State of Uttarakhand