Exoneration of accused by material witnesses including the victim during trial warrants grant of bail.

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking release in connection with Crime No. 352/2025

The applicant was accused of kidnapping a minor (17 years and 9 months) and committing penetrative sexual assault under Sections 137(2), 127(2), 64, 64(2)(m), and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 3/4 and 5L/6 of the POCSO Act

The applicant has been in custody since November 23, 2025; his first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on January 7, 2026

Subsequent to the first dismissal, the victim (PW-1) and her father (PW-2) were examined before the trial court on March 9, 2026, where they failed to support the prosecution’s case and stated that the victim was a major at the time of the incident

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in light of the hostile testimony of material prosecution witnesses and the applicant's socio-economic status

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

The court also assessed standard bail jurisprudence concerning the likelihood of recidivism, the potential for tampering with evidence, the socio-economic status of the accused, and the impact of prolonged pre-trial incarceration

The court observed that the primary ground for bail was a material change in circumstances: the victim (PW-1) and her father (PW-2) exonerated the applicant during trial, testifying that no compulsion or force was used and asserting that the victim was an adult

The court noted that because these material witnesses had already been examined, there was no longer a risk of the applicant tampering with their testimony

While the State opposed bail citing three criminal antecedents, the court observed that the applicant had never been convicted of a major offence and was a young labourer/driver supporting a family

The court found that the determination of the victim's age and the applicant’s complicity were matters for trial, but prima facie, the hostile evidence weakened the prosecution's case significantly

Given the applicant's socio-economic status, the court found no compelling reason to continue his incarceration or any likelihood of him fleeing from justice

The court allowed the application and directed that the applicant be released on bail...conditioned upon the furnishing of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one solvent surety of the same amount, subject to conditions including regular court attendance, non-involvement in similar offences, and a prohibition against tampering with remaining evidence or threatening witnesses