A Rohini POCSO Court granted bail to a 21-year-old accused, observing that continued custody would serve no purpose after completion of the investigation, filing of the charge sheet, and absence of any apprehension expressed by the victim.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A POCSO Court at Rohini, Delhi, on Thursday granted regular bail to a 21-year-old accused in a case involving allegations of sexual assault on a minor girl, noting that the investigation was complete and continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose.
The bail order was passed by Ms. Pooja Jain, Additional Sessions Judge-05 (POCSO), North District, Rohini Courts, while hearing an application moved under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) read with Section 439 of the CrPC.
Background of the Case
The FIR in the present matter was registered on 06 August 2025 on the complaint of the victim’s mother, who reported her 17-year-old daughter missing since 04 August 2025. The victim was subsequently brought to the police station on 18 August 2025, the same day on which the accused also appeared before the police.
During her statement, the victim levelled allegations of sexual assault against the accused during the period she stayed with him.
Arguments Presented
Defence Submissions
Counsel appearing for the accused (Suraj) argued that the applicant had been in judicial custody since 18 August 2025 and was falsely implicated at the instance of the victim’s family. It was contended that the accused was brutally assaulted by the victim’s relatives before being produced at the police station, a fact allegedly corroborated by his Medico-Legal Certificate (MLC).
The defence further submitted that the victim and the accused were in a consensual relationship and that the case arose out of a familial dispute over the alleged relationship. Emphasis was also placed on the delay in registration of the FIR, the absence of the accused’s name in the initial complaint despite prior acquaintance, and alleged contradictions in the victim’s statements.
It was additionally argued that the MLC of the victim did not reveal any injuries, and that the charge sheet itself reflected inconsistencies regarding the victim’s age.
State’s Opposition
Opposing the bail plea, the Special Public Prosecutor submitted that the victim was a minor and, therefore, the provisions of the POCSO Act were clearly attracted. It was argued that minor contradictions could not dilute the seriousness of the allegations.
Court’s Observations
The Court noted that statements of the victim’s mother and brother indicated that both the victim and the accused were traced by the victim’s family on the night of 17 August 2025, though the information was conveyed to the police only on 18 August 2025.
The Court observed:
“Cumulative reading of the chargesheet and the statements of material witnesses clearly reveals that the family of the victim had traced the whereabouts of the victim and the accused on 17.08.2025 (night) itself.”
The Court also took note of the accused’s MLC, which corroborated physical assault at around 2:00 a.m. on 18 August 2025.
Importantly, the Court observed that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had already been filed, and the trial was likely to take considerable time. It was further recorded that the victim did not express any apprehension from the accused’s family.
Bail Granted with Conditions
Taking note of the fact that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed, and the trial would take time, the Court held:
“Considering the above stated facts and that the victim has not shown any apprehension from the family of the accused, no purpose would be served by keeping the accused behind the bars.”
Accordingly, the accused was granted bail on furnishing a personal bond of ₹20,000 with one surety of the like amount, subject to strict conditions including:
- No contact with the victim or her family
- No tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses
- Mandatory intimation to the Court upon change of address
- Keeping mobile phone location services switched on at all times
- Not indulging in any similar or other offence while on bail
ALSO READ: Second-Highest in the Country: Report Highlights Delhi’s Disposal Rate for POCSO Cases
The Court clarified:
“Anything mentioned herein shall not tantamount to any expression of opinion on the merits of the case.”
Since the matter pertains to a POCSO Court, the order has not been uploaded on the website. Copies were directed to be supplied dasti to the accused, the victim, the Investigating Officer, and the Jail Superintendent concerned.
Appearance:
For the State: Shri J.S.Malik, Learned Special PP
For applicant/ accused: Shri Monesh Kumar, Shri Vikrant Dabas and Ms. Ami Sisodia, Learned Counsel
Case Title:
STATE Vs. SURAJ
SC NO.6924/25
READ ORDER
Click Here To Read More Reports on POCSO