Negative DNA report and hostile testimony of material witnesses warrant grant of bail in POCSO cases.

The applicant, a 20-year-old labourer, was arrested on December 16, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 431 of 2025

He was accused of kidnapping a minor victim (aged 16 years and 5 months) and committing penetrative sexual assault

Charges were registered under Sections 137(2), 64(1), 64(2)(m), 127(2), 351(3), 96, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 3/4 and 5L/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012

During the trial, the victim (PW1) and her brother (PW2) were examined and did not support the prosecution's version; they further claimed the victim was a major at the time of the incident

Additionally, the DNA examination report failed to substantiate the allegations of sexual assault

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in light of the hostile testimony of material prosecution witnesses and an exonerating DNA report

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

The Court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail

The court also referenced the substantive provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012

The judicial reasoning was guided by the principle that bail should be considered when there is no likelihood of recidivism, tampering with evidence, or fleeing from justice, especially when material witnesses have already been examined and the forensic evidence (DNA) does not support the prosecution's case

The Court evaluated the gravity of the offences against the evidence recorded during the trial.

It noted that the primary prosecution witnesses—the victim and her brother—denied the prosecution's narrative and raised doubts regarding the victim's age

The Court found that the DNA report significantly weakened the prosecution's case as it did not support the accusation of sexual assault

Regarding the conduct of the applicant, the Court observed he is a young man (20 years old) with no criminal history and has family responsibilities, which minimizes the risk of him fleeing or committing further offences

Since the material witnesses have already testified, the Court concluded there was no immediate risk of the applicant tampering with evidence

Consequently, the Court held that the applicant’s contentions possessed prima-facie merit and did not warrant continued incarceration

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

This release is subject to several conditions, including regular attendance at trial hearings, a prohibition on committing similar offences, and a strict injunction against inducing or threatening anyone acquainted with the facts of the case

The Court clarified that any breach of these conditions could lead to the cancellation of bail