Hostility of material witnesses and lack of coercive evidence warrant grant of bail in POCSO proceedings.

The applicant, Kalu, was arrested on October 29, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 307 of 2025 registered at Police Station Raoti, District Ratlam

He was charged with kidnapping a minor (allegedly aged 15 years and 6 months) and committing penetrative sexual assault

During the trial, the material prosecution witnesses—the victim (PW1) and her father (PW2)—did not support the prosecution's allegations.

They testified that the victim was approximately 20 years old at the time of the incident and that no misdeed, inducement, or force was exercised by the applicant

The applicant, a 20-year-old laborer with no prior criminal record, filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, asserting a consensual romantic relationship

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

The substantive charges involved Sections 127(3), 137(2), 64(1), 64(2)(m), and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 5L/6 of the POCSO Act

The Court relied on the principle that bail may be considered when prosecution witnesses do not support accusations of force or inducement, and when there is no prima facie risk of recidivism, fleeing from justice, or tampering with evidence based on the accused's lack of criminal antecedents and socio-economic condition

The Court examined the case diary and the depositions of PW1 (victim) and PW2 (father).

It noted that the victim did not allege any misdeed, inducement, or compulsion against the applicant; rather, she claimed to be an adult at the time of the incident

The Court found that the allegations of enticement or force were prima facie missing from the evidence recorded during the trial

Furthermore, the Court observed that the applicant is a 20-year-old laborer with no criminal history, making the risk of him influencing witnesses or committing further offences unlikely

Given that the trial would take time to conclude and the applicant had been in custody since October 2025, the Court held that there were no compelling reasons to continue his incarceration

The Court held that the contentions regarding the romantic nature of the relationship and the victim's age had prima facie merit given the recorded evidence

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety of the same amount

The release is subject to conditions, including regular court attendance, a prohibition on committing similar offences, and a mandate not to induce or threaten witnesses