Bail was warranted where the victim alleged no penetrative assault and the investigation was complete.

The petitioner sought regular bail in a case arising from Crime No. 125/2026 of Ranebennur Police Station, involving alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

The complainant, the victim’s mother, reported that her minor daughter had gone missing on 12 May 2026; the petitioner and the victim were traced on 21 May 2026.

The victim’s statement was that the petitioner took her to a temple, tied a duplicate taali around her neck, and later took her to his aunt’s house, where he touched her body.

The investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been filed.

The petitioner maintained that the case arose from a love affair and that he was entitled to bail; the State and the victim’s mother opposed release.

1. Whether the petitioner should be released on regular bail while facing the charged offences under the BNS, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, and the POCSO Act.

2. Whether the completion of the investigation, the victim’s statement, and the available forensic and medical material supported release subject to conditions.

The petition was considered under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which empowers the High Court to grant bail.

The Court applied the discretionary bail assessment, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the potential sentence, the risk of absconding, the accused’s antecedents, and the possibility of witness tampering.

No judicial precedent was cited.

The Court considered the victim’s account that the petitioner tied a duplicate taali and touched her body, but found that her statement did not allege penetrative or aggravated sexual assault.

It also noted the absence of seminal stains in the FSL report and the lack of medical evidence connecting the petitioner to the alleged sexual offences.

Since the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been filed, the Court found no likelihood of witness tampering and concluded, having regard to the relevant bail considerations, that release with conditions was justified.

Bail was subject to conditions that he not tamper with or threaten prosecution witnesses, attend court regularly, and not involve himself in any offence.

The Court clarified that its observations were made only for disposal of the bail petition.