01Facts
The petitions arose from Crime No. 191 of 2025 registered by Belur Police following a complaint that the complainant’s 17-year-old daughter had gone missing.
pp. 4–5Accused No. 1, Abhilash, was arrested and remanded to custody; his application for regular bail was rejected by the Sessions Court.
pp. 4–5His parents, accused Nos. 2 and 3, sought anticipatory bail after their application was rejected by that court.
pp. 4–5The victim’s statement before the Magistrate did not allege conduct attracting the charged POCSO offence against accused No. 1 or allegations against accused Nos. 2 and 3.
p. 6The investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed.
p. 6The victim’s mother, appearing as respondent No. 2, stated that she had no objection to the petitions being allowed.
p. 502Issues
i.1. Whether accused No. 1 should be enlarged on regular bail in the pending Special Case.
pp. 4–5, 7ii.2. Whether accused Nos. 2 and 3 should be granted anticipatory bail in the same case.
p. 5, 703Law Applied
The Court considered the bail and anticipatory-bail powers invoked under Sections 483 and 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, respectively, in relation to charges under Sections 137(2), 45 and 64 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
pp. 4, 7–9The order identifies no precedent or more detailed legal test; it treats the completed investigation, the victim’s statement, and the circumstances of the accused as relevant to granting bail subject to conditions.
pp. 6–7Provisions in the judgment · 11 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 438Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 482Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137Section 45Section 64Section 65Section 3Section 183
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 6
04Reasoning
The Court noted that the victim’s statement did not contain allegations against accused No. 1 attracting the alleged POCSO offence, and did not implicate accused Nos. 2 and 3; it also noted that the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed.
p. 6Taking those circumstances into account, together with respondent No. 2’s lack of objection, the Court concluded that both regular and anticipatory bail were warranted, subject to conditions.
pp. 5–705Holding
The Court allowed Crl.P. No. 15403 of 2026 and directed that accused No. 1 be released on bail on a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum, subject to conditions including regular court attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and not leaving the trial court’s jurisdiction without permission.
pp. 7–8It also allowed Crl.P. No. 15852 of 2026 and directed that accused Nos. 2 and 3 be released in the event of arrest, subject to appearing before the Investigating Officer within 15 days, executing bonds of ₹1,00,000 each with two sureties each, cooperating with the investigation, and complying with the other stated conditions.
pp. 8–10Original Court PDF
ABHILASHvsSTATE BY BELUR POLICE
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
