{"id":7589,"date":"2026-05-13T15:09:08","date_gmt":"2026-05-13T09:39:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/?p=7589"},"modified":"2026-05-13T14:42:29","modified_gmt":"2026-05-13T09:12:29","slug":"pocso-allegations-rape-case-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/pocso-allegations-rape-case-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"POCSO Allegations | Missing CCTV, Contradictory Statements, No Medical Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Grants Bail To Hockey Coach In Minor Player Rape Case"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Can a man lose his freedom even when medical reports show no signs of sexual intercourse?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Uttarakhand High Court granted bail after noting that the medical record reportedly showed no injury, no live spermatozoa, and no signs of sexual intercourse.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NAINITAL:<\/em>The Uttarakhand High Court<\/a><\/strong>, in a judgment passed by Justice Alok Mahra<\/strong>, granted bail to a National Hockey Coach accused in a rape <\/a>and POCSO <\/a>case<\/strong> registered at SIDCUL Police Station, Haridwar<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case was filed after the father of the victim alleged that he received a phone call from an assistant hockey coach on 5 January 2025, informing him that his daughter had been raped by the applicant during a hockey camp<\/strong> being held for National Games selection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the FIR, the victim was staying in a hostel with other players<\/strong> when the alleged incident took place. The complainant and his family immediately rushed to the hostel and allegedly found that police had already reached the spot. The applicant was arrested there itself. The FIR further stated that blood was coming from the private parts of the victim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the hearing, the Court considered the medical material placed on record. The order records that the doctor found-<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cExcessive bleeding from the private parts of the victim as victim was having her menstrual cycle period at that relevant point of time.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Court also took note of the medical certificate, which stated that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThere is no injury and no live spermatozoa were found in vaginal swab, and furthermore, no sign of sexual intercourse was seen in her private parts.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The High Court further considered the fact that CCTV footage relating to the alleged incident was not available <\/strong>because the DVR memory had reportedly become full over time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court also noted that there were contradictions in the statements of the complainant and the victim<\/strong>. Another circumstance considered by the Court was the argument that even if the allegations in the FIR were accepted on their face value, the entire alleged incident was claimed to have occurred within a period of only fifteen minutes<\/strong>, which the Court noted while considering the bail plea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While granting bail, the High Court observed that the applicant had remained in judicial custody since 06.01.2026<\/strong> and that both the complainant and the victim had already been examined during the proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Considering these facts, the Court held that there were no chances of tampering<\/strong> with evidence or influencing witnesses and therefore found it to be a fit case for grant of bail<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accordingly, the Court directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties<\/strong> before the concerned court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Explanatory Table: Laws And Sections Involved<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Law \/ Section<\/strong><\/td>Purpose<\/strong><\/td>How Applied In This Case<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/thead>
Section 64(2)(f) BNS<\/a><\/strong><\/td>Punishment for rape under aggravated circumstances<\/td>Deals with aggravated rape allegations under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita<\/td><\/tr>
Section 127(2) BNS<\/strong><\/td>Wrongful confinement-related aggravated provision<\/td>Concerns unlawful restraint\/confinement allegations connected with offence<\/td><\/tr>
Section 5(N) POCSO Act<\/strong><\/td>Aggravated penetrative sexual assault<\/td>Applies where penetrative sexual assault is alleged under aggravated circumstances<\/td><\/tr>
Section 6 POCSO Act<\/strong><\/td>Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault<\/td>Provides punishment for offences covered under Section 5 POCSO<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Case Details<\/h3>\n\n\n\n