Regular bail granted where minor victim supported the relationship and confirmed continued residence with the accused.

The applicant filed his sixth application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking regular bail in Crime No. 295/2025 registered at Police Station Saleha, District Panna, for offences under Sections 137(2), 64(1) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 5(L)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

The victim’s parents reported her missing on 11 September 2025. She was allegedly recovered from the applicant’s house on 5 December 2025, medically examined, and her statements were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS.

The applicant was arrested on 7 December 2025, and DNA analysis allegedly established that he was the biological father of the fetus conceived by the victim.

The applicant contended that the victim, aged approximately 17 years and 1 month, had voluntarily left home due to their relationship and had resided with him as his wife.

Four earlier bail applications had been withdrawn, while the fifth application had been dismissed on merits on 16 July 2026.

Whether the applicant, accused of offences under Sections 137(2), 64(1) and 87 BNS and Sections 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS in the circumstances of the case.

Whether the victim’s statements regarding her relationship with the applicant, her having left her parental home, her continued residence at the applicant’s house, and the applicant’s period of custody justified grant of bail despite her being a minor and the DNA evidence being positive.

The Court applied Section 483 BNSS, which empowers the High Court to grant bail in cases involving an accused in custody.

In assessing bail, the Court considered the surrounding circumstances, the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the applicant’s period of custody, the parties’ relationship, and the likelihood of the applicant’s appearance at trial.

Bail was made subject to the statutory requirements of Section 480(3) BNSS, including compliance with the conditions governing release on bail.

The Court noted that the victim was approximately 17 years and 1 month old, had been reported missing, and was later recovered from the applicant’s residence.

It also acknowledged the medical and DNA evidence, including the finding that the applicant was the biological father of the fetus.

Nevertheless, upon examining the case diary, the Court gave weight to the victim’s statements that she knew the applicant, was in a relationship with him, had left her parental home out of love and affection, and had resided with him.

The Court further considered that the victim, who was present before it, stated that she was still residing at the applicant’s house, and that the applicant had remained in custody since 7 December 2025.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, the Court concluded that the circumstances justified release on bail.

He was required to appear before the trial Court on all dates fixed during the pendency of the trial and to comply with Section 480(3) BNSS.

The application was accordingly disposed of, without any determination on the merits of the criminal case.