THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK

(Criminal Jurisdiction)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SINGLE BENCH : THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BAIL APPLN. No.01 of 2026

Petitioner/Accused : Rochan Pradhan

versus

Respondent : State of Sikkim

Application under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance

Mr. Abhi Kant Jha, Ms. Preeti Basnett, Ms. Jaya Shree Pradhan

and Mr. Anish Byahut Advocates for the Petitioner/Accused.

Ms. Pema Bhutia, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-

Respondent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of Hearing : 11-02-2026

Date of Order : 11-02-2026

Date of Uploading : 11-02-2026

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER (ORAL)

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. The instant application for bail has been filed by the

Petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 31 of the Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, the “POCSO Act”),

seeking enlargement of the Petitioner/accused on bail. He is

presently in judicial custody having been arrested in connection

with Sadar Police Station, Gangtok, FIR No.108 of 2025, under

Section 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the

Prosecution case arises from a consensual romantic relationship

between the Petitioner, who was nineteen years at the time of the

alleged offence and the alleged victim girl who was aged about

fifteen years and six months at the relevant time. Learned

Counsel urges that the existence of a romantic relationship

BAIL APPLN. No.01 of 202 6 2

Rochan Pradhan vs. State of Sikkim

between the accused and the victim has been admitted in the FIR

and is corroborated by the statement of the victim recorded

during the investigation. In fact, the Medico Legal Examination

Report of the victim does not indicate the use of force, violence,

coercion or unnatural sexual acts. The FIR came to be lodged

after the victim was taken by her mother to the STNM Hospital,

Gangtok, when the victim was found to be running a fever.

During the treatment, it came to light that the victim was

pregnant and hence the criminal justice system was set into

motion with the lodging of the FIR. That, the Petitioner is not a

criminal and was in a consensual relationship with the victim and

they had consensual sex which resulted in the pregnancy. The

records of the Prosecution indicate that although the alleged

victim was counselled to undergo a Medical Termination of

Pregnancy, she on her own will refused to undergo the procedure.

That, on 16-01-2026, the victim girl has given birth to a girl child

and the Petitioner has not even seen the child till date. That

apart, the parents of the Petitioner are taking care not only of the

new born baby but also of the victim. That, previously an

application for bail was filed by the Petitioner before the Court of

the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Gangtok, Sikkim,

however the Petition was disposed of by a single paragraph Order,

rejecting the application for bail, on grounds that it was statutory

rape. That, humanitarian consideration may be given by this

Court and since Charge-Sheet has already been filed and the trial

is underway and in fact there was no criminality in the act of the

Petitioner who is a permanent resident of this State, the Petition

BAIL APPLN. No.01 of 202 6 3

Rochan Pradhan vs. State of Sikkim

for bail be allowed. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any

conditions imposed by this Court.

3. Resisting the submissions advanced , Learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that not only was the victim a

child, being a little over fifteen years of age but the gravity of the

offence, which is a statutory rape has also to be given due

consideration, hence the Prosecution objects to the Petition for

bail and urges that the Petition be rejected accordingly.

4. I have heard the rival contentions of Learned Counsel

for the parties. It needs no reiteration that the Petitioner was

nineteen years old at the time of the offence and he was arrested

on 07-08-2025 when it came to light that the victim was pregnant

on 06-08-2025, when she was taken for treatment for fever to

the hospital. The records at this juncture indicate that the parties

were in a romantic relationship and a sexual encounter between

them resulted in the pregnancy. It is evident from the records, as

also submitted by Learned Counsel for the Petitioner , that, the

Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. He was working as a Chef

in a hotel. In light of the aforedetailed circumstances, he was

arrested on 07-08-2025. He has been in judicial custody since.

(i) Having given due consideration to the submissions

advanced, in my considered view, keeping the Petitioner under

incarceration would be a travesty of justice , when the

circumstances and the facts advanced before this Court at this

juncture do not in fact indicate any criminal intent on his part.

5. However, I hasten to add that these remarks are only

for the purposes of the instant bail Petition and are not to be

construed as an opinion on the merits of the Case. When the trial

BAIL APPLN. No.01 of 202 6 4

Rochan Pradhan vs. State of Sikkim

is taken up, the concerned Court shall rely solely upon the

evidence furnished before it to reach a conclusion regarding the

alleged offences.

6. In view of the facts and circumstances, as detailed

hereinabove, the Petitioner be enlarged on bail, subject to the

following conditions;

(i) The Petitioner shall furnish PB & SB of ₹ 30,000/-

(Rupees thirty thousand) only, each, with two solvent

sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the

Court of the Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012),

at Gangtok, Sikkim.

(ii) The Petitioner shall report before the Investigating

Officer of the Case, Sadar Police Station, Gangtok, on

every Monday and Thursday at 10.00 a.m.

(iii) The Investigating Officer shall maintain a Register to

mark the attendance of the Petitioner on such dates.

(iv) The Petitioner shall not leave Gangtok District without

the prior permission of the Investigating Officer.

(v) The Petitioner shall be present before the Court of the

Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012), at Gangtok,

Sikkim, on all dates when the trial is fixed and as and

when required.

7. Bail Petition is allowed and disposed of.

8. A copy of this Order be forwarded to the Learned Trial

Court immediately for information.

9. A copy of this Order also be forwarded to the Jail

Authority, State Central Prison, Rongyek, Gangtok and to the

Investigating Officer and Station House Officer , Sadar Police

Station, Gangtok, for information and compliance.

( Meenakshi Madan Rai )

Judge

11-02-2026

Approved for reporting : Yes

ds/sdl