Bail was refused where charge-sheet material indicated active participation in serious POCSO and SC/ST offences.

The appellant, accused No. 3, sought regular bail under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in a case arising from the victim’s suicide.

The prosecution alleged that the appellant instigated accused No. 1 to continue a sexual relationship with the victim and that accused No. 1 subsequently raped her, leading her to commit suicide.

The appellant argued that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed, his alleged role was limited to abetment, and he had been in custody since 18 June 2026.

The appeal was from proceedings in Spl. S.C. No. 76/2026 before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad.

The appeal was brought under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The charges included Sections 107, 78, 64(2) and 49 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Sections 4, 8 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v-a) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The court noted the prosecution’s reliance on Section 17 of the POCSO Act, under which abetment followed by the commission of the abetted offence attracts the punishment provided for that offence.

On considering the complaint and the witness statements recorded by the Investigating Officer and filed with the charge sheet, the court found that the material disclosed the appellant’s active participation in the alleged offences.

It accepted the State’s submission that the offences were serious and held that the appellant should not be released before the material witnesses were examined.

Although the investigation was complete and the appellant argued that his role was limited to abetment, those submissions did not persuade the court to grant bail at that stage.

It concluded that, in light of the charge-sheet material indicating active participation and the need to examine material witnesses, the appellant was not entitled to release at that stage.