Bail granted where allegations were limited to gestures and comments insulting the victim’s modesty.

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 0339/2026, registered for offences under Sections 64, 64(1), 64(2)(m), 70(2), 75(1)(ii), 79, 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the POCSO Act

The complaint alleged that other co-accused had established physical relations with the victim; the allegations against these applicants were limited to making indecent gestures and comments, without an allegation of physical assault, rape or video recording

Charges had been framed against the applicants under Section 79 BNS, the charge-sheet had been filed, and they had been in custody since 9 June 2026; they had no criminal antecedents

The victim, appearing by video-conference with her parents, objected to bail

The application was made under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the procedural basis for the Court to consider regular bail.

The applicants’ alleged conduct was treated as falling within Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, concerning words, sounds, gestures or acts intended to insult a woman’s modesty; charges against them had been framed under that provision.

The Court identified no precedent or further legal test, and assessed bail by reference to the allegations, custody, criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet and likely time to conclude the trial.

The Court distinguished the applicants’ alleged role from the sexual-assault allegations against other accused: the State acknowledged that the victim had not named these applicants in connection with sexual assault, while the allegations against them concerned gestures and words.

In view of the charges being confined to Section 79 BNS, the completed investigation and filed charge-sheet, their custody since 9 June 2026, lack of criminal antecedents and the prospect of delay in concluding the trial, the Court considered the applicants entitled to bail despite the victim’s objection.

It imposed conditions directed at preventing interference with witnesses or the trial and requiring attendance.

Bail was subject to conditions prohibiting inducement, threats or promises to persons acquainted with the case; conduct prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; non-appearance before the Trial Court; and involvement in a similar offence.

The Court stated that its observations were limited to the bail application and would not bind or influence the Trial Court.