Uttarakhand High Court
Kushagra Sharma @ Romy vs State Of Uttarakhand on 6 August, 2026
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
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 No.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 64 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 floor 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. Manjeet 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 shows
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. Kushagra
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 after
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 IOs 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 “Cancer” 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 1st
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 Head 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.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
Nitesh/
