Uttarakhand High Court
X ……..Appellant/ vs State Of Uttarakhand on 23 February, 2026
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2025
In
Criminal Appeal No. 588 of 2025
X ........Appellant/Applicant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ........... Respondent
Present : Mr. Tarun Prakash Singh Takuli, Advocate for the appellant/applicant.
Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, Brief
Holder for the State.
Coram : Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani. J.
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and
order dated 02.09.2025, passed in Special Sessions Trial No.53 of
2019, State of Uttarakhand vs. Juvenile in Conflict with Law, X, by
the court of Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional District Judge,
Dehradun. By it, the appellant has been convicted under Sections
363, 366-A, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4, 17 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the Act) and sentenced
under Sections 363, 366-A IPC and Section 4 and 17 of the Act .
The appellant seeks bail during pendency of the appeal.
2. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2025
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the co-
convicts have already been granted bail; the appellant was 16 years
of age at the time of incident; he was in romantic relationship with
the victim, this fact is admitted by the victim during trial. He has
referred to the statement of the victim recorded during trial.
2
4. These facts are not disputed by learned State Counsel.
5. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this
stage is to be avoided. To the extent of appreciating the controversy
the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation
made at this stage shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of
the case.
6. At the time of incident, the appellant and the victim,
both were much young and they were in romantic relationship.
7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a
case in which the execution of sentence should be suspended and
the appellant/applicant be enlarged on bail.
8. The bail application is allowed.
9. The execution of sentence, which is under challenge in
this appeal shall remain suspended during the pendency of the
appeal.
10. Let the appellant/applicant be released on bail, during
pendency of the appeal on his executing a personal bond and
furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the court concerned.
11. List in due course.
(Ashish Naithani, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.)
23.02.2026
Sanjay
