Bail granted in POCSO case as material witnesses failed to support allegations of force or inducement.

In brief

The question

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in light of the hostile testimony of material witnesses and the absence of criminal antecedents.

The court held

The High Court allowed the first bail application, holding that the applicant's continued incarceration was not warranted.

It also directed

The court ordered the release of Govind Verma on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of the same amount.

The release is subject to conditions including: (1) mandatory presence at hearing dates; (2) abstaining from similar offences; (3) non-interference with witnesses or evidence; and (4) compliance with Section 346 of the BNSS regarding the examination of witnesses.

01Facts

The applicant, a 19-year-old labourer, was arrested on September 24, 2025, for allegedly kidnapping a minor victim (aged 16 years and 1 month) and subjecting her to penetrative sexual assault.

¶ 2, 7

Following the registration of Crime No. 332 of 2025 at Police Station Pachore, District Rajgarh, the applicant sought bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023.

¶ 2

During the trial, material prosecution witnesses—specifically the victim (PW2) and her father (PW1)—were examined but did not support the prosecution’s accusations.

¶ 5, 7

The defense contended the case was one of teenage romance and that allegations were made under family pressure.

¶ 5

02Issues

i.Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in light of the hostile testimony of material witnesses and the absence of criminal antecedents.

¶ 7, 8

03Law Applied

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the discretionary power to grant bail.

¶ 2

The court considered the penal provisions under Sections 137(2), 65(1), and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, alongside Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶ 2

The court further relied on established bail jurisprudence concerning the socio-economic status of the accused, the likelihood of recidivism, the potential for tampering with evidence, and the period of judicial incarceration.

¶ 8

Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483 Section 346

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137 Section 65 Section 69

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 3 Section 4

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 309

04Reasoning

The court observed that the material witnesses, including the victim, failed to allege any misdeed, inducement, or force against the applicant during their testimony.

¶ 7

It noted that the "prima facie" merit of the applicant's contention—that the case involved a consensual adolescent relationship—could not be dismissed as baseless at this stage.

¶ 7

Regarding the risk of flight or tampering, the court highlighted that the applicant is a 19-year-old labourer with no criminal antecedents and limited means, making recidivism or interference with remaining witnesses unlikely.

¶ 6, 8

The court determined that since the trial would take time to conclude, continued incarceration was unnecessary given the lack of compelling reasons to deny liberty.

¶ 7, 8