Karnataka HC Denies Bail In POCSO Case Against Man Accused Of Repeatedly Sexually Assaulting A Child, But Allows Fresh Plea After Complainant And Victim Are Examined

In brief

The question

1. Whether the petitioner had established grounds for regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, given the nature of the allegations and the material relied upon by the prosecution

The court held

The Court dismissed the bail petition, finding that the petitioner had not made out grounds for release.

It also directed

It left open the petitioner’s liberty to apply to the trial Court or Special Judge for bail after the complainant and the victim have been examined.

01Facts

The petitioner, aged 23, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in a case arising from Crime No. 05/2026 and pending as Spl. Case (POCSO) No. 249/2026.

p. 2 · ¶ 2

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner took the complainant’s daughter, aged about 14, from her home and repeatedly sexually assaulted her; the victim’s statement was relied upon in support of the allegations.

pp. 4–7 · ¶ 4, 6–7

The investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed. The petitioner had been in judicial custody since 17 January 2026 and had already been refused bail by the Sessions Court.

pp. 3, 5, 9–10 · ¶ 3, 5, 11–12

02Issues

i.1. Whether the petitioner had established grounds for regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, given the nature of the allegations and the material relied upon by the prosecution

pp. 2–3, 7–10 · ¶ 2–3, 7–12

ii.2. Whether completion of the investigation, the petitioner’s period in custody, or the victim’s alleged willingness to accompany him justified granting bail

pp. 6–9, 11 · ¶ 6–11

03Law Applied

The Court considered Section 483 of the BNSS, which empowers the High Court to grant bail, alongside the charged offences under Sections 137(2) and 64 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

p. 2 · ¶ 2

In assessing bail, it considered the seriousness and prescribed punishment of the alleged Section 6 POCSO offence, the prima facie material on record, and the risk of interference with witnesses or the trial.

pp. 3, 7–9 · ¶ 3, 7–10

The Court also applied the principle that a child’s consent is immaterial to the alleged POCSO offence.

p. 7 · ¶ 7

Provisions in the judgment · 6 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483 Section 183

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137 Section 64

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 4 Section 6

04Reasoning

The Court found that the victim’s statements and the other prosecution material disclosed a prima facie case of the petitioner taking the child from her home and repeatedly committing aggravated sexual assault.

pp. 6–8 · ¶ 6–8

It held that the petitioner’s assertion that the victim accompanied him voluntarily could not, at the bail stage, displace the allegations because her consent was immaterial under the POCSO Act.

p. 7 · ¶ 7

The Court further considered the gravity of the alleged offence, the possibility of witness interference and harm to the trial, and concluded that neither the filing of the charge sheet nor more than eight months’ custody constituted a sufficient ground for release in the circumstances.

pp. 3–4, 8–10 · ¶ 3, 10–12