Bail Granted Where the Victim Said She Voluntarily Provided Jewellery and Investigation Was Complete

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in a case registered under Sections 74 and 308 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant had molested and blackmailed the 15-year-old victim and obtained gold jewellery from her, which he later mortgaged.

The applicant argued that the relationship was consensual, that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS said she had provided the jewellery, and that investigation was complete and the charge-sheet filed. He had been in custody since 17 July 2026 and had two non-similar antecedents.

The State opposed bail, citing the alleged blackmail and two live criminal antecedents; the victim’s parents also objected.

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, empowers the Court to consider an application for regular bail.

In deciding bail, the Court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, the applicant’s antecedents, the status of the investigation, the period of custody, and the likely time to conclude the trial.

The offences alleged were under Sections 74 and 308 of the BNS and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

No precedent was cited.

The Court weighed the seriousness of the allegations and the State’s objection against the applicant’s two antecedents, noting that neither was of a similar nature.

It also considered the victim’s Section 183 statement that she had provided the jewellery, the completion of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s custody since 17 July 2026, and the likely delay before trial conclusion. On those circumstances, the Court found the case fit for regular bail without expressing any opinion on the merits.

It directed the applicant’s release on a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like amount, subject to the trial Court’s satisfaction.

The applicant must not threaten or induce anyone acquainted with the case facts, must not prejudice a fair and expeditious trial, and must attend each trial date until disposal.

The observations were limited to the bail application, and the trial Court was directed to decide the case on its own merits.