Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2209/2025 of SUNIL SINGH ALIAS SONU BUNGLA Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 22 July 2026
SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/2209/2025 Sunil Singh Alias Sonu Bungla --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. M.
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1/2209/2025
Sunil Singh Alias Sonu Bungla
--Applicant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. M. Vikas Pande, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mrs. Rangoli Purohit, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present applicant ‘Sunil Singh @ Sonu Bungla’ S/o Sri Khushal Singh is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 17.09.2025 bearing FIR No. 117 of 2025 P.S. Kotwali Pithoragarh, District Pithoragarh, which was lodged against the unknown person for the offence punishable under section 140(3) of BNS, 2023.
4. During investigation the victim was recovered from the possession of the applicant after one month and then the applicant is chargesheeted for the offence punishable under sections 137(2), 65(1) of BNS, 2023 r/w section ¾ of POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Pithoragarh District Pithoragarh.
5. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and infact the applicant known to the victim since last 5 years and they were friends and were in talking terms and send messages through Instagram to each other and the victim herself left her parental house and go with the applicant. They also visited Haryana, which is evident from the statement of the victim to the Doctor at the time of medical examination. He further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 17.09.2025 and have no criminal antecedents and taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has already been filed and there is no need for further custodial interrogation the applicant be released on bail.
6. On the other side, learned A.G.A. Mrs. Rangoli Purohit oppose the bail application by submitting that as per the medical report the hymen was found to be torn and there are sufficient evidences with regard to the sexual assault. She further submits that at the time of incident age of the victim was 13 and ½ years, therefore, her consent has no relevance due to her age though during her medical examination she discloses that she known the applicant since last five years.
7. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has been filed and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 17.09.2025 and have no criminal antecedent, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail.
8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant ‘Sunil Singh @ Sonu Bungla’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. After being released on bail the applicant shall join the trial court proceeding on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. The applicant shall surrender his passport within three days, if any, to the trial court. iii. After being released on bail the applicant shall not give any threatening either to the victim or her family members.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 22.07.2026 PR