Regular bail granted where the minor victim turned hostile and prolonged trial was anticipated.

The applicant was arrested on 08.06.2026 in connection with Crime No. 354/2026 registered at Police Station Surajpur for offences under Sections 64 and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act)

The prosecution alleged that the applicant sexually assaulted the victim, who was approximately 14 years, 2 months and 16 days old, on the pretext of marriage, following which the victim lodged the FIR

During the bail proceedings, the victim and her mother appeared virtually and the victim consented to the applicant’s release on bail

The applicant contended that, although the charge-sheet recorded the victim’s age as below 15 years on the date of the incident, she stated in her court deposition that she was 19 years old and did not support the prosecution case

The State opposed bail on the ground that the victim was below 15 years of age and that serious allegations had been made against the applicant

Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, despite the allegations under Sections 64 and 69 of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act

Whether the victim’s failure to support the prosecution case, her denial of the suggestions made by the Public Prosecutor, the period of custody, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial justified grant of bail

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the grant of regular bail by the High Court or Court of Session

The alleged offences were under Sections 64 and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012

In determining bail, the Court considered the relevant circumstances, including the nature of the evidence at that stage, whether the victim supported the prosecution, the period of incarceration, and the likely duration of the trial

Bail was granted subject to conditions intended to secure the applicant’s presence, prevent delay, and address misuse of the liberty of bail

The Court noted that the victim had already been examined and had not supported the prosecution case; she had also denied the suggestions put to her by the Public Prosecutor

Although the State relied on the victim’s recorded age being below 15 years and the seriousness of the allegations, the Court treated the victim’s testimony, the applicant’s custody since 08.06.2026, and the likelihood that the trial would take considerable time as circumstances favouring release on bail

The victim’s appearance through virtual mode and her consent to bail were also recorded

On balancing these factors against the seriousness of the offences, the Court found the applicant entitled to bail, while imposing conditions requiring his attendance and cooperation with the trial

The applicant was required not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, and to appear personally at the opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS

The order further authorised appropriate proceedings in case of absence, misuse of bail, or failure to comply with the conditions