2 1 . BA] SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2026:UHC:3838 BA1 No.453 of 2026 Sohail @ Suhail Vs. State of Uttarakhand Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Akhil Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present bail application is filed by the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No.07 of 2026 under Section 351(3), 64(2)(m) of BNS and 5(1)/6 POCSO Act and 67(B) IT Act, P.S. Danya, District Almora. 4. The FIR is lodged by the father of the victim with the allegation that he along with his wife had gone to Haldwani for treatment and when they returned on 12.02.2026 at 6 p.m. his daughter/victim aged about 16 years was frightened. When the complainant asked the victim she told him that one Sohail, son of Mohammad Jeeshan Ali Yunus, a resident of Bhagatpur, Moradabad, who studies at Polytechnic Danya was harassing her for past several days and about 20 days agao, Sohail had come to her house at night, raped her several times and took her photographs. Now the accused/applicant is threatening the victim that if she told her parents, he would make her photographs viral and kill her. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR is lodged after 20 days of delay. He submits that applicant and victim were in consensual romantic relationship. He submits that applicant used to talk with the victim on phone regularly and also sent money to victim’s account as well as her sister’s account. He submits that applicant has no criminal antecedents and is a law abiding citizen. 6. Learned State counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that accused is confined to judicial custody in connection with his involvement to the present case. He submits that according to the statement of victim recorded under Section 180 of BNSS she has clearly stated that accused has forcibly made physical relations with her; took her nude photographs and blackmailed her to make the said photographs viral. Thus the victim has sufficiently stated the role and involvement of the accused/applicant. He further submits that if applicant is enlarged on bail the chances of misuse of bail are quite alive as he is the resident of State of Uttar Pradesh. Therefore, applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Having heard the rival contention of the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that applicant has committed a heinous crime with a minor girl, hence the bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 18.05.2026 Arti