Bail granted to accused in POCSO case where material witnesses turned hostile regarding victim's age and incident.

The applicant, a 19-year-old laborer, was arrested on August 15, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 496/2025.

He was charged with kidnapping and penetrative sexual assault of a 13-year-old victim under Sections 137(2), 96, 64(1), and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

Following the dismissal of his first bail application on November 24, 2025, the applicant filed this second application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023.

Key prosecution witnesses, including the victim (PW-1) and her parents (PW-2, PW-3), subsequently testified before the trial court, failing to support the prosecution’s accusations and claiming the victim was a major at the time of the incident.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the subsequent examination of material witnesses and the lack of criminal antecedents?

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

It also considered the substantive penal provisions of Sections 137(2) (Kidnapping), 96 (Slavery/Selling minors), 64(1) (Rape), and 65(1) (Punishment for rape of a woman under 16) of the BNS, as well as Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act (Penetrative sexual assault).

The court weighed standard bail jurisprudence factors, including the likelihood of tampering with evidence, the risk of recidivism, and the socio-economic status of the accused.

The Court noted that since the rejection of the first bail application, significant progress occurred in the trial: the victim and her parents were examined and turned hostile, disputing the victim's age and the allegations of assault.

The Court observed that the determination of the victim's age remains a matter for the trial, but the contentions regarding a "romantic relationship" and the victim being a major possessed prima facie merit.

The Court found that as the material witnesses had already been examined, the risk of the applicant tampering with evidence was significantly diminished.

Given the applicant's youth (19 years), his socio-economic status as a laborer, and the absence of any prior criminal record, the Court found no compelling reason to justify continued incarceration during the remainder of the trial.

The holding is conditioned upon a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, and strict adherence to five bail conditions: appearance at all hearings, non-commission of similar offenses, no tampering with evidence or witnesses, and compliance with Section 346 of the BNSS regarding trial attendance.

Any breach of these conditions may result in the automated cancellation of bail.