Hostile Testimony of Material Witnesses and Doubtful Age Determination Justify Grant of Bail in POCSO Case

The applicant, a 27-year-old labourer, was arrested on September 16, 2025, for the alleged kidnapping and penetrative sexual assault of a minor victim (aged 15)

The charges were registered under Sections 96, 64(2)(m), and 65(1) of the BNS; Section 5L/6 of the POCSO Act; and various sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

During the trial, the victim (PW-1), her mother (PW-2), and her father (PW-3) turned hostile, stating the victim was 19 years old at the time and exonerating the applicant of any forceful acts

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the hostile testimony of vital prosecution witnesses and the disputed age of the victim

2. Whether the applicant poses a risk of fleeing from justice or recidivism given his socio-economic status and lack of criminal antecedents

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, governing the grant of bail

The court adhered to the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly when material witnesses have already been examined and the trial's conclusion is pending

The court considered the gravity of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

The Court observed that while the initial accusation involved the sexual assault of a minor, the testimony of the victim and her parents significantly weakened the prosecution's case

The witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-3) denied any element of force or enticement and claimed the victim was an adult (19 years) at the time of the incident, making the determination of age a matter of trial

The Court noted that the material witnesses had already been examined, negating the risk of evidence tampering

Given the applicant's status as a young labourer with deep family roots and the likelihood that the trial would be prolonged, the Court found no compelling reason for his continued incarceration

The State confirmed the applicant had no prior criminal record

The Court allowed the application and directed that the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the same amount

The holding is contingent upon several conditions: the applicant must attend all court hearings, refrain from committing further offences, and not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence