CANCELLATION OF BAIL MANDATED WHERE TENDER AGE OF POCSO VICTIM AND INVESTIGATION STAGE ARE OVERLOOKED.

On 30.04.2026, a three-year-old minor victim, a student at a junior school in Janakpuri, reported to her mother that a man at school had taken her downstairs and touched her private parts, causing pain.

An FIR was registered under Section 64(1) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

The victim identified the respondent (a school caretaker/UDC) and a female teacher who allegedly cleaned the blood.

CCTV footage showed the respondent in the junior wing between 08:13 AM and 08:37 AM on the day of the incident.

The Trial Court granted regular bail on 07.05.2026, primarily citing the respondent's exit from the wing at 08:37 AM, his cooperation with the investigation, and the absence of external injuries in the MLC.

The State and the complainant challenged this bail order.

1. Whether the Trial Court erred in granting regular bail by failing to consider the gravity of the offence and the vulnerability of a three-year-old victim.

2. Whether the absence of immediate medical injuries or specific exit times in CCTV footage justifies the grant of bail in an ongoing investigation involving aggravated penetrative sexual assault.

The court primarily applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's inherent power to set aside orders to secure the ends of justice.

Section 6 of the POCSO Act (aggravated penetrative sexual assault).

Principles established in Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee, which mandate considering the nature of the crime and the likelihood of influencing witnesses when granting bail.

X v. State of Uttar Pradesh, reaffirming that the absence of medical injuries on a minor does not automatically entitle an accused to bail given the statutory rigour of POCSO.

The High Court observed that the Trial Court granted bail just one week after the arrest while the investigation was at a "crucial stage".

The Court reasoned that a three-year-old child cannot be expected to provide an "accuracy of time" or a perfectly "coherent" narrative like an adult, yet the victim consistently identified the respondent and the crime scene.

The Court found the Trial Court’s reliance on the respondent exiting the building at 08:37 AM to be insufficient to doubt the victim's version at the preliminary stage.

The Trial Court failed to account for the respondent’s potential influence over school staff witnesses and the fact that he was one of only two males in the wing.

The Court held that "mini-trials" and detailed evidence weighing are impermissible during bail hearings, especially when forensic reports are awaited.

The respondent’s bail was cancelled, and he was directed to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO Court on 01.07.2026.