Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Uttarakhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. April

Krishna Bahadur vs. State of Uttarakhand

Decided on 30 April 2024• Citation: BA1/800/2024• High Court of Uttarakhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                   HIGH   COURT    OF  UTTARAKHAND        AT  NAINITAL              
                           First Bail Application No. 800 of 2024                   
                  Krishna Bahadur                         ….....Applicant           
                                           Versus                                   
                  State of Uttarakhand                   ….….Respondent             
                  Present:-                                                         
                       Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate for the applicant.                
                       Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A. for the State.                
                  Hon’ble  Ravindra   Maithani,  J. (Oral)                          
                            Applicant  Krishna   Bahadur   is  in  judicial         
                  custody  in Case  Crime  No.62 of 2023,  under  Sections          
                  363, 376IPC  and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children        
                  from   Sexual   Offences  Act,  2012,   Police  Station-          
                  Patelnagar, District- Dehradun. He has sought his release         
                  on bail.                                                          
                  2.        Heard   learned counsel  for the  parties and           
                  perused  the record.                                              
                  3.        Learned   counsel  for  the  applicant  would           
                  submit  that the victim has not supported the prosecution         
                  case  in her  cross examination;  her  statement is not           
                  reliable.                                                         
                  4.        Learned  State Counsel would  submit  that the          
                  victim has, though, supported the prosecution case in her         

                                              2                                     
                  examination-in-chief, but in her cross examination, she           
                  has not supported the prosecution case.                           
                  5.        Having  considered, this Court  is of the view          
                  that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to      
                  be enlarged on bail.                                              
                  6.        The bail application is allowed.                        
                  7.        Let the applicant 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.                                                  
                                                   (Ravindra Maithani, J)           
                                                          30.04.2024                
                  Ravi Bisht