High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 10 UK CK 0140

Roshan Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 15 October 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Mahra, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 1259 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 313 words

Alok Mahra, J

1.

Applicant Roshan Singh, who is in judicial custody in Case Crime/FIR No.84 of 2025, under Section 376 of IPC, registered at P. S. Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

3.

As per the prosecution story, the applicant and the complainant were in a love relationship since the year 2021. During this period, they developed physical relations on several occasions. In February 2025, the complainant became pregnant, whereafter the applicant allegedly gave her a pill claiming it to be for abortion. Subsequently, when the complainant asked the applicant to marry her, he refused, stating that he was already married.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the complainant reiterated the facts stated in the FIR and admitted that the relationship between her and the applicant was consensual. He has further submitted that there is a considerable delay in lodging the FIR; that, applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case.

5.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application.

6.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the relationship between the parties, the contents of the statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNS, and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

The bail application is thus, allowed and the applicant is directed to 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.