State vs Kriti Sahni

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: July 08, 2026
% Pronounced on: July, 15, 2026

+ CRL.M.C. 4328/2026, CRL.M.A. 17440/2026
STATE .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.V. Raju, ASG with Mr.
Aman Usman, APP for the State
versus

KRITI SAHNI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. K.K. Manan, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
M.S. Bammi, Ms. Uditi Bali, Mr.
Ms. Nida Akhtar, Mr. Manish
Kumar and Mr. K. S. Choudhary,
Advs.
ACP Vijay Singh, with Insp.
Babita, DIU/ West Distt.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE


J U D G M E N T

1. By virtue of the present petition under Section 528 of theBharatiya
1
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the
2
order dated 20.05.2026 , passed by the learned ASJ (SC-POCSO), South
3
West District, Dwarka Courts, Delhi , in Bail Matter No.4137 of 2026 in
FIR No.104 of 2026 registered at PS.: Janakpuri, Delhi under Sections
4
64(2) / 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 6/17/21 of
5
the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 , whereby the

1
Hereinafter as “ BNSS ”
2
Hereinafter as “ Impugned order ”
3
Hereinafter as “ learned Trial Court ”
4
Hereinafter as “ BNS ”
5
Hereinafter as “ POCSO Act ”
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 1 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

respondent was granted regular bail.
2. As per facts involved, on 28.04.2026, the victim, aged about three
years, i.e., daughter of the complainant, was enrolled in the Nursery Class
at a Junior School at Narang Colony, Janak Puri, Delhi. Thence on
30.04.2026, at about 04:00 PM, after returning from school at around
12:00 noon and waking up from sleep, the minor victim started crying and
pointed to her private part, complaining of severe pain. The victim
disclosed to the complainant that a “ bada sa ladka ” present at school had
taken her downstairs and he had touched his finger in her private part
causing pain and bleeding. This lead to registration of the FIR involved
herein.
3. Thereafter on 02.05.2026, the victim in her statement recorded
under Section 183 of the BNSS, had specifically described the role of the
“ Madam ” in commission of the offence as the “ Madam ” who had taken
her to the basement, took her clothes off and cleaned the blood stains as
also had given her sweets. During investigation on 05.05.2026, whence
the video-recorded identification proceedings were ongoing, the victim
identified the respondent as the said “ Madam ”, thereby corroborating the
aforesaid statement.
4. During further investigation, the blood-stained tissue paper and a
piece of bedsheet, recovered from the scene of the offence, were sent for
examination. The medical records obtained from Sehgal Neo Hospital,
including the ultrasound report, revealed that the victim was undergoing
treatment for a urinary tract infection and a bladder infection following the
incident.
5. Pursuant thereto, the respondent was arrested on 14.05.2026 only to
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 2 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

be granted regular bail by the learned Trial Court on 20.05.2026 vide the
impugned order. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner State seeks
cancellation/ setting aside of the impugned order dated 20.05.2026.
6. Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG submitted that the learned Trial Court
erred by not considering the nature and gravity of the offence involved, as
also the role attributed to the respondent and the bail was granted in a
mechanical manner. The learned Trial Court had relied upon
circumstances that are at best equivocal while disregarding overwhelming
material pointing to the respondent’s complicity. In fact, the impugned
order does not reflect any proper balancing of the liberty of the respondent
and the gravity of the offence, the safety of the minor victim, and the
integrity of the ongoing investigation, as is mandated by law. Reliance in
this regard is placed upon Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi
6 7
Administration) , Mohan Singh v. Union Territory and Prasanta
8
Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee .
7. On the merits involved, Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG submitted that
the learned Trial Court has impermissibly conducted a mini-trial at the
stage of considering bail by scrutinising the credibility of the victim’s
statement and entertaining unsubstantiated allegation that she had been
tutored by her mother, i.e. complainant, despite there being no material on
record, which, as held by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Satish Jaggi v. State
9
of Chhattisgarh , is impermissible, as the credibility of statements at the
stage of granting bail cannot be gone into. More so, it was submitted that

6
AIR 1978 SC 179
7
AIR 1978 SC 1095
8
(2010) 14 SCC 496
9
(2007) 11 SCC 195
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 3 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

the learned Trial Court erred in treating the absence of external injuries in
the MLC as conclusive against the allegation of sexual assault, whilst
completely overlooking the subsequent medical records evidencing that
the child was treated for a urinary tract infection and bladder infection
following the incident as also the factum that 64 CCTV cameras were not
functional casts a shadow of doubt on the co-accused persons, including
the respondent herein.
8. Additionally, it was also argued by Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG that
the learned Trial Court also failed to appreciate the significant prima facie
circumstance that, on the date of the incident, the minor victim was
admittedly under the custody and care of the respondent in her capacity as
a Class Teacher, who had refused to permit her early departure from
school despite being informed that she was unwell. More so, the impugned
order overlooks the strict, victim-centric approach as mandated under the
POCSO Act by placing undue emphasis on the respondent’s clean
antecedents and her status as a mother.
9. Further, Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG submitted that the
respondent’s long-standing association with the school places her in a
position to influence staff members who are material witnesses to the case
and although the complainant’s apprehension of intimidation and
interference with the investigation, however, no consequential safeguards
were imposed, nor due weight was accorded to the aforesaid significant
consideration, while granting bail.
10. Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG lastly submitted that since the reasons
for releasing the respondent herein on bail are extraneous and perverse,
the impugned order is liable to be set aside, in light of the aforesaid
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 4 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

factors.
11. Per contra , Mr. K.K. Manan, learned senior counsel for the
respondent, whilst supporting the impugned order submitted that the
learned Trial Court had rightly granted bail to the respondent as she was
falsely implicated and has no connection to the incident. He submitted that
the respondent has been a teacher at the school for 13 years with no prior
antecedents. He further contended that the victim’s medical examination
does not reveal any fresh injuries or other physical findings expected in
light of the said allegations made in the complaint.
12. Mr. K.K. Manan, learned senior counsel submitted that the name of
the respondent neither appears in the complaint nor in the FIR and only
surfaced later in the statement made under Section 183 BNSS, which is an
afterthought to widen the case and also a consequence of tutoring the
victim. More so, the respondent was arrested belatedly and that too with
no incriminating material to justify her custody, especially as she has
joined the investigation and the Investigating Officer has confirmed that
no further investigation is pending against her.
13. Lastly, Mr. K.K. Manan, learned senior counsel contended that the
respondent has never attempted to influence any witness or tamper with
the evidence and has consistently co-operated with the investigation. In
fact, the co-accused has already been granted bail, and the respondent had
sought the same relief on the ground of parity. Based on the above, it was
prayed that the present petition is liable to be dismissed.
14. This Court has heard the learned ASG as also learned senior
counsel for the respondent and has gone through the documents and
materials on record alongwith the judgments cited.
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 5 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

15. As borne out, the primary issue requiring consideration pertains to
whether the impugned order dated 20.05.2026 granting bail to the
petitioner is perverse and/ or extraneous, if so, then does it call for
exercising inherent powers vested under Section 528 of the BNSS by this
Court.

16. Before adverting to the merits involved, it is necessary to note that
while a Court is considering granting any bail in cases involving sexual
offences against children and/ or women, essential surrounding factors
like (grave) physical, emotional, mental and psychological harm, and their
consequences, suffered by such children and/ or women as victim,
essentially since they are likely to cause harm, a lasting impact on their
life as also may have lasting consequences on their dignity, future and
overall development do, not only need to be kept in mind, but also have to
be given due weightage. These proceedings wherein the petitioner State is
seeking cancellation of regular bail granted by the learned Trial Court is
one of such.
17. The aforesaid assume greater significance whence the proceedings
herein are under the POCSO Act, with respect to a three-year-old girl
child . It cannot be ignored that the POCSO Act is a special legislation
enacted to address the inadequacies of the existing legal framework in
dealing with sexual offences against children. In fact, the legislature being
conscious of the facts as aforesaid enacted the POCSO Act to
comprehensively set the parameters for punishing offences while
advancing the principles of restorative and compensatory justice for child
victims. Such matters, thus, warrant utmost care, attention and caution,
particularly , at the stage of considering release of the accused on bail.
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 6 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

18. On the other hand, this Court is also conscious that though it is also
a well-settled position of law that a Court should ordinarily refrain from
interfering with an order granting bail, however, as held by the Hon’ble
10
Supreme Court recently in X v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another , if it
is found that a Court of law, like the learned Trial Court herein, has
overlooked material considerations in a case involving a grave offence as
it (might have) failed to adequately consider the nature and gravity of the
offence, the statutory rigors of the POCSO Act, and the vulnerability of
the child victim, interference therein is justified.
19. In fact, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case entitled P v. State of
11
Madhya Pradesh , prior thereto went onto lay the factors whence the
order granting bail can be set aside. For ease of reference, the relevant
parts thereof are extracted as under:-
“ 24. As can be discerned from the above decisions, for
cancelling bail once granted, the court must consider
whether any supervening circumstances have arisen or the
conduct of the accused post grant of bail demonstrates that it
is no longer conducive to a fair trial to permit him to retain
his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during trial
[Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana, (1995) 1 SCC 349:1995
SCC (Cri) 237]. To put it differently, in ordinary
circumstances, this Court would be loathe to interfere with
an order passed by the court below granting bail but if such
an order is found to be illegal or perverse or premised on
material that is irrelevant, then such an order is susceptible
to scrutiny and interference by the appellate court. ”

( Emphasis Supplied )

20. Keeping the aforesaid in mind, and under the facts and

10
2026 SCC OnLine SC 43
11
(2022) 15 SCC 211
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 7 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

circumstances involved, it assumes significance that the learned Trial
Court has, interestingly , while allowing the application of the respondent
seeking regular bail, in the impugned order dated 20.05.2026, has gone
onto to observe as under:-
“ Though the Ld. Counsel for applicant / accused had also
pointed out to the initial statement of the complainant
wherein it has not been mentioned that the teacher of the
child victim was also involved in the incident, but as a matter
of fact such a young child of approximately 3 years cannot be
expected to reveal all the details at the initial stage.
xxx
Moreover, as stated while disposing the previous bail
applications, this is not the stage to make any opinion
regarding the authenticity of the allegations contained
therein, especially when the child victim is merely 3 years of
age but after going through the arguments, it is clear that
initially the child victim had not disclosed about the role of
her class teacher to her mother or to the doctor concerned at
the time of her medical examination and consequently, the
name of the applicant / accused was not mentioned in the
complaint. Moreover, the present applicant/ accused was
arrested after around 13 days of the alleged incident and
there is no allegations that the present applicant/ accused
had ever tried to interfere in the investigation or influence
witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner,
whatsoever before her arrest. Moreover, the present
applicant / accused has joined the investigation as and when
called by the investigating agency and had never tried to
avoid her presence for investigation. Moreover, the
Investigating Officer had admitted that no investigation qua
the present applicant/ accused is pending… … ”

21. As apparent therefrom, the learned Trial Court was well aware of
the factual position on hand, and that any three-year-old girl child like the
victim herein cannot be expected to reveal all/ each and every detail at the
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 8 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

time of making the initial complaint. In any event, as held by the Hon’ble
12
Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Ramjan Khan & Ors. and
13
CBI v. Tapan Kumar Singh , the first complaint and/ or the FIR itself is
not the gospel truth or an encyclopedia, which can always be supported
later on at different stages, provided there is nothing contrary therein.

22. This Court finds that, despite thereto, the learned Trial Court has
gone onto to primarily proceed to grant regular bail to the respondent on
the premise merely because the victim failed to disclose the name of the
respondent in the complaint and which only surfaced in her statement
under Section 183 of the BNSS. The victim has not only disclosed the
name of the respondent but also identified her later at the time of video-
recorded identification proceedings.
23. Thus, in the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Trial
Court erred in completely ignoring the crucial fact that the victim had not
only identified the respondent herein in the presence of the complainant/
her mother but also the very spot where the incident took place.
Additionally, the tissue paper as also a piece of a bedsheet has also been
recovered.

24. The aforesaid, in view of well-settled position of law, and also in
the considered opinion of this Court, has wrongly been taken as a
benchmark for granting regular bail to the respondent. More so, since as
held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Bihar v. Rajballav
14
Prasad it is trite law that the veracity/ credibility of a victim at the stage

12
2024 SCC OnLine SC 3070
13
(2003) 6 SCC 175
14
(2017) 2 SCC 178
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 9 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

of granting bail is not to be traversed into. Material/ relevant
considerations have been ignored by the learned Trial Court, especially,
while it was dealing with one under the POCSO Act.
25. Strangely, and though there is no bar, the learned Trial Court
proceeded to grant regular bail to the respondent barely within six days of
her arrest, when a bare perusal of the impugned order does not reflect
anything which could/ may have prompted it to do so.
26. This Court has also to consider that the learned Trial Court has also
overlooked/ ignored the fact that the respondent has, admittedly , been a
teacher in the same School wherein the alleged incident happened for the
last thirteen years , and thus she was holding a post of significance and/ or
authority. Therefore, there may be some likelihood of her tampering with
evidence and/ or influencing the witnesses, which can have a bearing in
the outcome of the present FIR. Moreover, when the proceedings currently
are at a nascent stage which have also been given a go-bye by the learned
Trial Court.
27. In view of the afore-going, considering the facts and circumstances
in toto as also the established position of law, the impugned order dated
20.05.2026, passed by the learned ASJ (SC-POCSO), South West District,
Dwarka Courts, Delhi, in Bail Matter No.4137 of 2026 in FIR No.104 of
2026 registered at PS.: Janakpuri, Delhi under Sections 64(2) / 3(5) of the
BNSS and Sections 6/17/21 of the POCSO Act, is set aside.
28. Consequently, the respondent is hereby directed to surrender before
the jurisdictional Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Court) within three
days of this judgment at or before 12:000 Noon.
29. Accordingly, the present petition alongwith the pending application
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 10 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30

is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
30. Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are
solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present petition and shall
have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved.



SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
JULY, 15 2026/ bh
CRL.M.C. 4328/2026 Page 11 of 11

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:BABLOO SHAH
Signing Date:15.07.2026
16:00:30