Hostility of material witnesses and disputed age of victim warrant grant of bail.

The applicant filed his first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following his arrest on October 27, 2025

He was charged in connection with Crime No. 194/2025 for allegedly kidnapping a minor (aged 14 years and 5 months) and committing penetrative sexual assault

During the trial, the victim (P.W.1) and her father (P.W.3) turned hostile, stating that the victim was approximately 20 years old at the time of the incident and that the father had married the victim to the applicant

The applicant, a 20-year-old agriculturist, contended that the case arose from a romantic relationship and that the investigation was complete with the final report already submitted

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the hostile testimony of material witnesses regarding the victim's age and consent

2. Whether the continued incarceration of the applicant is warranted given his lack of criminal antecedents and the completion of material witness examinations

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail

The substantive charges were examined under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m), 65(1), and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 5(L)/6, 5(j)(ii), 16, and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012

The court also relied on established bail principles regarding the socio-economic status of the accused, the likelihood of recidivism, and the risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice

The court analyzed the merits of the bail plea by weighing the gravity of the POCSO allegations against the evidentiary developments in the trial.

It noted that the core of the prosecution's case—the victim's age and the element of sexual assault—was significantly weakened by the depositions of P.W.1 and P.W.3, who denied the accusations and asserted the victim was an adult

The court observed that since the material witnesses had already been examined, the risk of the applicant tampering with evidence was negligible

The court considered the applicant’s youth (20 years old), his clean criminal record, and his stable family roots as factors mitigating the risk of him fleeing or committing further offenses

The court concluded that the veracity of the victim’s age and the prosecution's claims are matters for the trial, and prima facie, there was no compelling reason to justify continued incarceration during the prolonged trial period

The holding established that the applicant shall be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court

The release is subject to specific conditions, including regular attendance at hearings, a prohibition on committing further offenses, and a restriction against tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses

The order remains effective until the conclusion of the trial