Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/925/2025 of RAJVEER SINGH ALIAS RAJU Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 12 June 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 No. 925 of 2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned Legal Aid counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pradeep
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
BA1 No. 925 of 2025
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. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned Legal Aid counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned AGA for the State.
3. Present applicant Rajveer Singh @ Rinku S/o Late Trilok Singh praying for bail in relation to FIR dated 25.07.2024, bearing FIR No. 0213 of 2024 at P.S. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, which was lodged against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 140(3) of BNS 2023.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.09.2024 and the trial has already been commenced and at the time of incident the applicant was 19 years old and the victim was only three years younger to him and in fact both of them were in love which is evident from the statement of the victim as enclosed in the counter affidavit as Annexure-2. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedent.
5. On the other side, Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned AGA for the State submits that since the victim was minor at the time of the incident, therefore, her statement has no relevance, however, he has not disputed that the present applicant have no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 07.09.2024 and the trial has already been commenced.
6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.09.2024 and the trial has already been commenced and applicant has no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves for bail.
7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant “Rajveer Singh @ Rinku” be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
12.06.2026 Nahid