Judgment reserved on:31.07.2026

Judgment delivered on:06.08.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

AT NAINITAL

IA No.01 of 2026 (Short Term Bail Application)

In

First Bail Application N o.1123 of 2026

Kushagra Sharma @ Romy. ………………… Applicant.

Versus

State of Uttarakhand. ……………Respondent.

Present:

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.

Mr. Tumul Nainwal, learned AGA, for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. The instant bail application is moved on behalf of the

present applicant – Kushagra Sharma @ Romy S/o Late

Commander Arvind Sharma, seeking regular bail in connection

with FIR dated 02.04.2026 bearing Case Crime No.129 of 2026,

lodged at Police Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun, wherein,

the informant/victim implicated Mr. Manjeet Johar and Mr.

Manav Johar, and the present applicant – Kushagra Sharma @

Romy, for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376 and 506

of IPC. On culmination of the investigation, the applicant is

chargesheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 6 4 and

351 of BNS, 2023, and the rest of the persons who were also

named in the FIR, namely, Mr. Manjeet Johar and Mr. Manav

Johar, have been exonerated.

2. Briefly stated that on a written complaint of the victim, an

FIR was registered bearing FIR No.129 of 2026 alleging, therein,

that the informant got married with one Mr. Sajal Khurana, in the

year 2016, and after the marriage, she resides with her husband

and in-laws and at that time, her husband runs a provisional

store, however, from 2021, he started a real estate business with

2

Mr. Manjeet Johar and Mr. Manav Johar, and she has noticed after

marriage that Mr. Manjeet Johar regularly visits the in-laws house,

and especially he comes when her husband and father-in-law

were not in the house, and what she has noticed that Mr. Manjeet

Johar, for several hours stay with her mother-in-law, and when

she try to convey her husband, he ignored by saying that Mr.

Manjeet Johar, is our God and only because of him, his entire

house is running. She further alleged that in January, 2022 when

she was in her room and doing some household work Mr.

Manjeet Johar, entered in her room, on which she annoyed and

objected, then he pushed her into bed and locked the room from

inside and forcefully committed rape, and at that time her mother-

in-law was in the house but has not objected and have not come to

her rescue however about this incident, she has never informed to

her father since he is a heart-patient. It is further alleged that she

came with her husband at Dehradun in a Hotel “M. J. Residency”

owned by Mr. Manjeet Johar, wherein, in top flo or he has an

office, and she saw that Mr. Manjeet Johar, is sitting alone in the

office, then she entered in washroom but Mr. Manjeet Johar,

follow her, then she shouted , due to which, he scared and leave

her, then she told to her husband that I want to go back, then both

rushed to Rishikesh and she apprised about this incident to her

husband Mr. Sajal Khurana, but he ignored and after fifteen days’

Mr. Manjeet Johar, again came and at that time her husband and

mother-in-law, both were in the house then Mr. Manjeet Johar,

told that I want to talk her lonely, on this her husband and

mother-in-law came out and thereafter Mr. Man jeet Johar,

threatened her to face dire consequences , and he also threatened

to kill her daughter, then she scared, and in such a situation, she

has no option except to accept his proposal . It is further alleged

that on 10.02.2023, her husband Mr. Sajal Khurana, took her to

3

“Belle Vista Pent House” and told that his friend and his wife are

coming and when she reached there, then son of Mr. Manjeet

Johar, namely, Mr. Manav Johar , was sitting and on asking from

Mr. Sajal Khurana, he told that Mr. Manav Johar, is my friend,

and his wife is coming after some time, then she sit there and her

husband left the place and thereafter Mr. Manjeet Johar offered

drink and after finishing the drink, she feel unconsciousness and

dizziness and when she became unconscious, and then she

noticed in the next morning she is in her own house, then her

Cook informed that Mr. Manav Johar, dropped her at about 5:30

AM in the morning in his Fortuner car, in an unconscious

condition, and thereafter, when she changed her clothes she

noticed bite marks in her body and thereafter she received a

Whatsapp message on her mobile at about 6:30 AM from

Whatsapp Mobile No.9897015000, of Mr. Manav Johar, wherein, it

was written that “thanks for the lovely evening yesterday

enjoyed. God Blessed ”. It is further alleged in the FIR that about

this incident, she told to her husband, but he ignored by saying

that everything is normal and thereafter Mr. Manjeet Johar and

Mr. Manav Johar, both regularly call her, but she ignored and she

was given regular threatening by them, and then she realized that

she is going in depression. It is further alleged that in January,

2024, her husband Mr. Sajal Khurana, took her in a “ Farmhouse”

at Ranipokhri, Dehradun, owned by Manav Johar where she was

introduced to Mr. Kushagra Sharma @ Romy, partner of Mr.

Manav Johar, by her husband and then Mr. Kushagra Sharma @

Romy, took her mobile number and thereafter he regularly call

her and in September, 2024, Mr. Kushagra Sharma @ Romy call

her and ask her to come at “Tapovan Lemon Tree Hotel” by

giving threatening that if she will not reach there, then he will

send her obscene photographs with Mr. Manav Johar, to her

4

father and in such a situation, she has no option except to accept

his proposal, then she reached in “Tapovan Lemon Tree Hotel”,

where Mr. Kushagra Sharma @ Romy was alone then he s hows

some photographs of obscene type which perhaps was taken by

Mr. Manav Johar, when she was in an unconscious condition on

10.02.2023 at “Belle Vista Pent House”, and then Mr. Kushagra

Sharma, commit rape, then he leave her in his car near her house

and thereafter on 18.09.2024 Mr. Manav Johar, also threatened call

her in his Farmhouse at Ranipokhri, Dehradun, where he also

raped her. It is further alleged that on 27.09.2024, again she was

threatened and call in a “ Hotel Divine Laxmanjhula ” where she

was raped, then on 21.10.2024, Mr. Kushagra Sharma, threatened

her to call her in “Hyat Residency Rajpur”, and then on

26.10.2025, he took her in “Aerosuits Jolligrant”, where she was

raped and in between Mr. Manav Johar and Mr. Kus hagra

Sharma @ Romy several times took her to “Aerosuits Jolligrant”,

and another places where she was physically assaulted and they

knows it very well about the condition of her family and took

undue advantage, and repeatedly she is being harassed and aft er

being completely broken mentally and physically, she told to her

sister who gave her courage and support then she approach the

Police and made a written complaint on 02.04.2026, at Police

Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun and on her complaint First

Information Report was registered. It is further alleged that since

2021 all these three persons, namely Mr. Manjeet Johar, Mr.

Manav Johar and Mr. Kushagra Sharma @ Romy, have sexually

assaulted her.

3. When this bail application came before this Court on

02.07.2026, it has been apprised that the victim also filed a WPCRL

No.942 of 2026, “Smt. X (Victim) Vs. State of Uttarakhand and

others”, and some few petitions were also filed before this Court

5

i.e. WPCRL No.832 of 2026, “Dinesh Kothari Vs. State of

Uttarakhand and others”, and WPCRL No.1157 of 2026,

“Kushagra Sharma @ Romy Vs. State of Uttarakhand” then the

records of those writ petitions have also been summoned for

perusal.

4. In WPCRL No.942 of 2026, victim prayed for transfer of the

investigation from Special Investigation Team (SIT) to Central

Bureau of Investigation (CBI), or in alternate to the Crime Branch

Criminal Investigation Department (CBCID), Uttarakhand to

ensure of fair and impartial and expeditious investigation.

5. In this petition, the main plea of the victim was that the

investigation was initially entrusted to Sub-Inspector Ms. Meenu

Yadav, and later to Sub-Inspector Ms. Himani Chaudhary, but the

conduct of both the Investigating Officers were biased, and in

reference to this, certain Whatsapp chats between the victim and

the Investigating Officer - Ms. Himanu Chaudhary, Sub-Inspector,

were also enclosed to show the conduct of the Investigating

Officer, who has been pressurized the victim to collect evidence

herself since mere allegations are not enough and the victim

herself would collect and furnish the evidence and all these

information were also shared with the accused persons , and

during the entire investigation the IO s never contact her. Various

other pleas were also taken in the petition in order to establish

that the ongoing investigation is biased.

6. In WPCRL No.942 of 2026, after taking serious note on such

plea the SSP, Dehradun, was called to join proceedings through

VC in order to assist who apprised that a separate Team has now

been constituted for further investigation. The learned AGA today

apprised that further investigation is going on and is at a crucial

stage.

6

7. Now in this bail application, learned counsel for the

applicant argued that the present applicant is innocent and has

been falsely implicated and in fact the informant was first time

introduced to the applicant in the year 2024, and in the FIR, she

disclosed about the incident of January, 2022, and the FIR has

been lodged at a belated stage i.e. on 02.04.2026, and in fact the

victim was familiar with the wife of the applicant as well as with

his minor daughters and in support of it, Whatsapp chats and the

group photographs have been shown to this Court in order to

show that even after the alleged incident she met with his family

members, which itself falsify the allegations as alleged in the First

Information Report.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that in this

FIR only the applicant has been chargesheeted and rest of the

accused persons, though named with serious allegations, namely,

Mr. Manjeet Johar and his son Mr. Manav Johar, have been

completely exonerated by observing that there is no evidence

against them with regard to the offence punishable under Sections

342, 376 and 506 of IPC, and now only the present applicant has

been chargesheeted, only for the offences punishable under

Section 69 read with Section 351 of BNS, 2023.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that

though the chargesheet has been filed for the offence punishable

under Section 69 read with Section 351 of BNS, 2023 but while

taking the cognizance, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Rishikesh, took cognizance for the offence punishable under

Section 64 read with Section 351 of BNS, 2023, after gone through

with the entire case diary learned counsel for the applicant

submits that though the chargesheet has been filed under Section

69 of BNS, 2023 read with Section 351 of BNS, 2023 but without

7

any material, the applicant have been chargesheeted for the

offences punishable under Section 64 read with Section 351 of

BNS, 2023.

10. He further argued that the wife of the applicant died in

May, 2024 due to chronic disease of “C ancer” and he has two

minor daughters and the younger one is studying in the same

Institution where the daughter of the victim is studying, due to

which, they both came in contact and also have an affair and

physical relation in between both of them are consensual and

there is no question of giving any threat and a specific averment

has been made in paragraph 6 of the bail application.

11. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that when

the husband of the victim came to know about the affair of the

victim with the applicant, then he also filed a suit seeking divorce

on the ground of adultery and the victim filed a case of

maintenance against her husband and now only in order to save

her matrimonial life, the victim made false and frivolous

allegations against the applicant and specific averment has been

made in paragraph 7 of the bail application.

12. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the

victim on her own and with free consent accompanied the

applicant to different Hotels, where they used to stay together and

the pictures were taken by the victim herself as a selfie, and it is

completely false that the applicant took obscene photographs of

the victim and the victim herself insists the applicant on different

occasions to meet and to go different places and stay together in

different Hotels and she also persuaded the applicant to go to

Goa, when the applicant had gone Goa with his family. He further

submits that the Whatsapp chat in between the victim and the

applicant clearly shows that they were in relationship and the

8

Whatsapp chat in between the victim and the daughter shows that

they were quite close to each other, and his daughter was also

very comfortable with the victim. He submits that in fact the

present applicant has been implicated by the victim only to save

her matrimonial life.

13. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the

case in hand is nothing but is a case of love affair between the

applicant and the victim, who were in relationship since long and

at no point of time the applicant make an attempt to forcefully

commit sexual assault upon her nor he has circulated any video

clip in the social media platform and as such no prima facie case is

made out against the applicant. He further submits that the

applicant is languishing in jail since 05.04.2026, however, the

arrest memo does not show that any ground of arrest in terms of

Section 47 of BNSS, 2023 was provided and in fact at the time of

the arrest, the applicant has not been informed about the ground

of arrest, and which is completely in violation of Article 21 (a) of

the Constitution of India, therefore, the applicant on this account

alone deserves for bail.

14. He further submits that there is no any material evidence

with the prosecution in chargesheeting the applicant and

allegation of making or circulating any obscene video is bald and

unsubstantiated without any evidence, as there is no recovery in

this regard and even there is no electronic or forensic evidence

which will link the applicant with the alleged act, hence, the entire

allegations on the face of it are false and concocted. He further

submits that since now the chargesheet has been filed, custodial

interrogation is not at all required.

15. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that after the

demise of the applicant’s wife there is no one in the family to look

9

after his minor daughters and since now the chargesheet has been

filed, there is no possibility that the trial would be expedited soon

and the applicant cannot be detained for an indefinite period in

judicial custody and is deserves for bail. He also submits that

there is no likelihood that the applicant after being released on

bail will make any tampering with the documentary evidence

since the investigation is already completed. He also submits that

the applicant have old aged mother, who is about 71 years old

and totally depends on the applicant, and if he is enlarged on bail,

he will not misuse the same.

16. On 09.07.2026, the State was directed to get the status of

ongoing further investigation.

17. On 24.07.2026, the SSP, Dehradun as well as the Head of the

Team constituted by SSP, Dehradun, Ms. Jaya Baluni, Additional

S.P. (Rural) joined the proceedings through VC and apprised to

this Court that one male Inspector and two female Sub-Inspectors,

are also included in the SIT, and apprised that further

investigation is going on in a very fair and transparent manner,

which will take some time and the SIT collected all the

documents.

18. A detail objections has been filed by the Prosecution,

wherein, it is stated that during investigation the statement of all

the accused persons were recorded, and the victim was sexually

assaulted by her husband’s business associates and sufficient

material has been collected during investigation and her husband

introduced to her three business partners and each of them

committed sexual assault upon her, though, there is also

matrimonial dispute in between the victim and her husband, and

the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183

10

of BNSS, 2023, consistently took the same stand about forceful

sexual assault.

19. Learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail application by

submitting that the Whatsapp chat in between the applicant and

the victim, as well as the victim’s daughter cannot by itself

establish relationship in between the applicant and the victim

were consensual and the submissions that the victim was

remained in friendly contact with the applicant and his family

cannot by itself read as conclusive proof of consent or false

implication.

20. He also submits that the husband of the victim in his own

statement discloses that at “Hotel Tapovan Lemon Tree” , he

himself furnished ID of another person to facilitate to make entry

in the room of the Hotel, where the rape was committed and this

admission of her husband itself corroborates with the prosecution

case, and it negates the theory of consent and demonstrates active

facilitation/conspiracy.

21. Learned AGA also submits that for the purposes of further

investigation, now the SSP, Dehradun also constituted a SIT,

headed by Additional S.P. rank Official to examine involvement

of other persons and now under scrutiny and the investigation is

at a crucial stage, therefore, at this juncture, when the further

investigation is being conducted by the SIT, it is not proper to

enlarge the applicant on bail, otherwise, it may affect the ongoing

further investigation. He further submits that if the applicant be

enlarged on bail, then he may in connivance with the other

persons, who are named in the FIR though exonerated earlier and

now under further investigation may make an attempt to frustrate

the ongoing investigation and there may be a possibility that they

11

all may collectively cause and to threaten the victim and her

minor daughter.

22. After filing of the counter affidavit, the applicant also filed

IA No.01 of 2026, seeking short term bail on the following

grounds:-

“(i) The applicant’s wife died due to chronic disease

cancer on 13.05.2024, leaving behind two minor

daughters aged about 12 and 5 years respectively.

(ii) There is no one in the family to look after school

going children and in the family the applicant has

old aged mother of 71 years, who is suffering from

various ailments, and is unable to walk properly and

it is very difficult for her to take care of his minor

daughters. The school certificates and Aadhaar Card

of the children have also been enclosed.

(iii) One of the daughters of the applicant is

suffering from “Neuro Problem” and she is under

regular treatment and is not well. ”

23. An objection has been filed by the informant/victim,

without disclosing her identity in view of the guidelines of the

Hon’ble Apex Court and in terms of the provisions as enumerated

under Section 72 of BNS, 2023 and the affidavit is filed in a sealed

cover, and the same are taken on record.

24. In paragraph 3 of the objections, it is stated that on

25.06.2026, two female members of the SIT came into the house of

the victim for further investigation, and when the members of the

SIT leaves the house of her in-laws, the in-laws pressurized to take

the case back and they also abused her as well as her daughter,

who is seven years old, due to which her daughter sustain

12

injuries, which was complaint to the concerned Police Station on

25.06.2026. The complaint as well as medical report of the victim’s

daughter is also enclosed as Annexure No.1, to the objections.

25. In paragraph 4, it is further contended that when she

approached to the concerned Police Station on 25.06.2026, she was

misbehaved by the Police personnel and refuse to receive her

application regarding the incident of 25.06.2026 , then she make a

call to 112 and thereafter her complaint was received at 10:30 PM

i.e. after 3 -4 hours of the incident and the incident is recorded in

the CCTV. It is further contended that she is having a digital

records and the same shall also be placed if this Court ask for.

26. In paragraph 5 of the objection, it is also contended that an

application was moved to the SSP, Dehradun through speed post

on 04.07.2026, regarding the incident of 25.06.2026, but no action

has been taken so far.

27. In paragraph 6 of the objection, it is further stated that when

no action was taken on her complaint, she filed a complaint on

20.07.2026 under Section 175 (3) of BNSS, 2023, the copy of which

is also enclosed as Annexure no.3. In paragraph 7, it is further

stated that she learnt that her husband also visited the concerned

Jail on 02.07.2026, to meet the applicant, which clearly shows the

involvement of her husband in the alleged crime, but till date no

action has been taken against him.

28. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the

learned AGA for the prosecution and also learned counsel for the

informant/victim at length, and also gone through with the entire

records, including the counter affidavit of prosecution as well as

the objections of the victim.

13

29. No doubt the allegations as alleged are sensitive relating to

a repeated sexual assault with the victim, and from the contents of

FIR it cannot be ruled out about the involvement of husband of

the victim in the entire episode. The FIR also reveals the

involvement of the other two persons, namely, Mr. Manjeet Johar

and Mr. Manav Johar, though they have been exonerated earlier

and now their conduct is also under further investigation, which

is being carried out by the SIT. The FIR reveals that the husband

of the victim runs a real estate business in association with Mr.

Manjeet Johar and Mr. Manav Johar. FIR contains the allegations

that there was frequent visit of Mr. Manjeet Johar, to the house of

in-laws of the victim, and even the places of incident and the date

is also mentioned in the FIR, and the incident was alleged to be

happened in the Hotel and the Farmhouse of Mr. Manjeet Johar.

The FIR talks about the incident of January, 2022, then February,

2022 and also of 10.02.2023, then of January, 2024. The FIR also

alleges of criminal conspiracy. The Whatsapp messages and chats

confirming the physical proximity and intent, and prima facie it

appears to be a case of continuous exploitation, and now at this

juncture when the present applicant is praying for bail, this Court

has to make a judicial scrutiny on certain parameters.

30. In Criminal jurisprudence the “ consent” obtained through

threat constitutes an offence of rape and it can be termed as

syndicate crime of sexual exploitation of a married lady, as per

her version. They all have exploited the victim sexually, and the

incident in different commercial places like “Tapovan Lemon

Tree Hotel” Hotels and Farmhouse owned by one of the person,

who is named in the FIR which indicates as per the FIR that in this

incident the group of people are involved and in such a situation

if the applicant is released on bail there is a high probability of

14

risk for destroying the electronic evidence or to pressurize the

hotel staff to wipe out the evidences.

31. So far as the delay part in lodging the FIR is concerned, the

argument, at this stage, cannot be accepted since the victim

narrated the events of different dates which is started from year

2022 to 2025, and with regard to the allegations of rape, it is very

difficult for a victim to lodge the FIR immediately. The victim

completely corroborated the prosecution case in her statement

recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, and as per the

objection of the victim herself, she also moved an application

under Section 175 (3) of BNSS, 2023, which reveals that she is

under profound coercion, fear and duress, and admittedly a new

SIT has been constituted by the SSP, Dehradun, for the purposes

of conducting a further investigation to examine the conduct of

other persons who are named in the FIR though have been

exonerated, and at this stage allowing the bail application when

further investigation is going on, it is not proper at the juncture to

enlarge the applicant on bail. Even otherwise, at this juncture, the

affidavit of the victim regarding threat perception is also one of

the factor in declining the regular bail to the present applicant.

32. The present applicant is also praying for short term bail on

certain grounds that his wife is no more died due to “Cancer”

having two minor daughters. One is suffering from “Neuro

Problem” and have old aged mother and there is no one in the

family to look after them.

33. No doubt the offence in which the applicant has been

chargesheeted is serious and ongoing further investigation by

another Special Investigation Team (SIT) is at a critical stage

which requires to investigate the involvement of other suspects,

and granting regular bail at this stage poses a clear risk of

15

threatening, tampering and destruction of evidence and most

importantly, this Court cannot ignored the genuine apprehension

of threat to the victim.

34. So far as the Humanitarian approach is concerned, this

Court must balance the stringent legal bar with humanitarian

approach, particularly when, the applicant/accused faces

following domestic problem:-

(i) The wife passed away due to Cancer on 13.05.2024.

(ii) Two minor daughters are deprived from parental care.

(iii) One minor daughter is also suffering from neuro

problem needed Psychological intervention.

(iv) Old aged ailing mother, who is physically incapable to

walk.

(v) There is no other adult family member to look after

daughters and manage the household or medical needs.

Therefore, in such a situation, the young children cannot

be deprived of parental care due to incarceration of their

father i.e. the present applicant, and simultaneously the

old aged mother also cannot be deprived from proper

basic needs, therefore, this Court take absolute

humanitarian approach in granting short term bail for a

limited period to the present applicant at this stage since

further investigation is going on. Consequently, this

Court passes the following orders:-

“(I) The application for seeking regular bail i.e. BA 1

st

No.1123 of 2026, stands dismissed.

16

(II) IA No.1 of 2026, seeking short term bail is allowed and

the applicant is admitted to short term bail for a period of

six weeks’ from the date of his release,

on his executing a

personal bond of Rs.1.00 lacs and furnishing two reliable local

sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the

Court concerned, subject to the

following conditions:

(i) On completion of the tenure of short term bail, the

applicant shall surrender to the court concerned.

(ii) The applicant after being released on short term bail

shall not contact, approach or threaten the victim or

her family members directly or indirectly or via

electronic media.

(iii) The applicant shall not visit the vicinity of the

victim’s residence or workplace.

(iv) The applicant shall fully cooperate with the new

SIT, constituted by the Senior Superintendent of

Police and shall report to the H ead of the SIT as and

when it requires and shall not leave the City

without leave of the Head of SIT.

(v) During the period of ongoing further investigation

conducted by the new SIT, the applicant shall not

approach to any other persons, who either named in

the FIR or suspect in further investigation in any

manner including via electronic media.

(vi) The applicant shall hand over his passport (if any)

to the Head of SIT forthwith.

(vii) In violation of any of the condition as aforesaid

would result to cancel the short term bail.

17

The copy of this order be forwarded to the Head of

the SIT (Special Investigation Team) to whom the

task of further investigation is given by the SSP.

(R akesh Thapliyal, J.)

Nitesh/