The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: iStock Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said that the POCSO Act is a beneficial legislation enacted to protect children from sexual offences and that proceedings under this law warranted prompt and sensitive handling.
The top court also emphasised that bail is not to be refused mechanically in such cases, but it must not be granted on irrelevant considerations or by ignoring material evidence.
Allowing a plea by the victim, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan set aside the Allahabad High Court's judgment of April 9, 2025, which granted bail to accused Arjun, after failing to take into account the nature and gravity of the offences and the statutory rigour under the provisions of the POCSO Act.
"The offences alleged in the present case are heinous and grave involving repeated penetrative sexual assault upon a minor victim committed under armed intimidation and accompanied by recording of the acts for the purpose of blackmail. Such conduct has a devastating impact on the life of the victim and shakes the collective conscience of society,'' the bench said in a judgement on January 9, 2026.
Upon noticing that the case involved allegations of gang rape of a minor coupled with the recording of sexual assault and threats of circulation, the court found the High Court's judgment suffered from serious infirmities. "The grant of bail by the High Court is vitiated by material misdirection and non consideration of relevant factors rendering the same manifestly perverse,'' the bench said.
The counsel for the accused claimed it was a case of consensual relationship. The court, however, found it wholly untenable in law, particularly because the allegations extended beyond a single accused and involved coercion, intimidation and multiple perpetrators.
The bench pointed out the statements of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS read with the medico-legal examination report prima facie established the commission of the alleged offences.
Directing the accused to surrender within two weeks, the court also noted the High Court failed to apply the settled parameters governing the grant of bail including the gravity of the offence, the vulnerability of the victim and the likelihood of witness intimidation, since the accused and the girl belonged to the same village in Shamli.
The minor victim claimed the present accused repeatedly established physical relations with her by pointing a locally made firearm (katta) at her. She alleged, along with him, his friends namely Goldi, Amit, Rupak and Vedansh used to abuse and molest her and also attempted to establish physical relations. After the bail, the present accused continuously threatened and intimidated the minor victim, forcing her to drop out from school, her counsel claimed.
"In offences involving sexual assault against children, the likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses constitutes a grave and legitimate concern. The safety of the victim and the need to preserve the purity of the trial process assume paramount importance,'' the bench highlighted.
The bench pointed out this court has consistently emphasised the need for expeditious disposal of POCSO cases, so it directed the trial court to give priority to the present case and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible.