Consent of Minor Victim Immaterial for Bail Where Evidence Suggests Voluntary Involvement and Lack of Inducement.

The applicant, Shyamlal, a 19-year-old labourer, was arrested on December 26, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 598/2025 at Police Station Taal, District Ratlam.

He was accused of kidnapping a minor victim (aged approximately 16 years and 5 months) and committing penetrative sexual assault after staying with her in a rented room in Indore for a week.

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, contending that the relationship was consensual and that the victim's statement under Section 183 of the BNSS did not allege force, inducement, or compulsion.

The investigation is complete, and the final report has been filed.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and the period of incarceration.

2. Whether the absence of criminal antecedents and the prima facie lack of force/compulsion in the victim's statement justify the applicant's release pending trial.

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.) regarding the discretionary power of the High Court to grant bail.

It considered the penal provisions under Sections 137(2), 96, 64(2)(m), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act.

Furthermore, the court adhered to the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly where the investigation is complete, there is no history of recidivism, and the accused's socio-economic status suggests a low risk of fleeing or tampering with witnesses.

The Court observed that while the victim was a minor, her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS prima facie lacked elements of enticement, force, or compulsion by the applicant.

The Court noted that the applicant is a young adult (19 years old) with no previous criminal record and family roots in the community.

It reasoned that since the final report had been submitted, the applicant’s continued incarceration was not necessary for investigation.

The Court found that given the applicant's socio-economic status as a labourer, there was no credible evidence suggesting he would flee justice or influence witnesses.

The Court emphasized that the veracity of the age of the victim and the merits of the prosecution's case are matters for trial, but the current circumstances favored the applicant's release.

It held that the applicant be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the same amount.

The release is subject to specific conditions, including attending all court hearings, refraining from committing similar offences, and not tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses.

The Court directed that any breach of these conditions would allow the trial court to consider the cancellation of bail.