IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Bail – As a general rule, application seeking cancellation of bail is to be filed before Court, which granted bail.
(2) In absence of any such power being vested in higher Courts either under Section 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 or any other provision of BNSS, 2023 and no such power being carved out in POCSO Act as well, bail once granted cannot be cancelled just for asking.

ORDER (ORAL)

V. Srishananda, J.—Heard Sri Sanjay A. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Aarti Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State and Sri Ashok B Mulage, learned counsel for respondent No.2 - accused.

2. Petition is filed under Section 483(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) with the following prayer:

“Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow the petition thereby cancel the impugned order dated: 03.05.2025 passed by Learned District and Sessions Judge, Yadgir extending bail to Accused No.1/respondent No.2 herein and direct the respondent No.1 Police to take custody of Accused No.1 in Crime No.33/2025 registered by Gogi PS, Taluka Shahapur, District Yadgir, in the interest of justice.”

3. Facts in brief, which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:

Upon the complaint lodged by Smt. Devibai, the mother of the victim girl, Gogi Police registered a case in Crime No.33/2025 on 12.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 137(2) read with Section 3(5) of BNSS, 2023 and under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’).

3.1 Police after registering the case, investigated the matter inter alia arrested the accused. Accused, who is respondent No.2 in this case approached the Sessions Court for grant of bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023.

3.2 Learned Sessions Judge after entertaining the objections of the prosecution and after hearing the parties, by considered order date 03.05.2025 allowed the petition inter alia imposed following conditions:

“1) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned police station once in three weeks preferably on Sunday between 10-00 a.m. and 6-00 p.m. till filing of the final report.

2) The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses.

3) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.”

4. Being aggrieved by the same, de-facto complainant has filed the present petition seeking cancellation of bail on the following grounds:—

• The impugned order dated: 03.05.2025 granting bail to Accused No.1 is against settled principles of law and further that in a short period the court below has extended the benefit of bail to the prime Accused who is Accused No.1 in the said case.

• The impugned order dated: 03.05.2025 extending bail to Accused No.1 is not justifiable since the matter is still under investigation and the respondent Police are yet to complete the investigation and lay charge sheet by collecting material evidence, the statement of the victim girl U/Sec.161 of Cr.PC as well as the statement of the victim girl recorded U/Sec. 164 Cr.PC makes out a clear case of the offence punishable U/Sec.4 of the POCSO Act, 2012, that being so the impugned order of granting bail to Accused No.1 by the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Yadgir deserves to be set aside.

• The Court below without properly appreciating the material evidence collected by the I.O during his investigation has hurriedly passed the order of extending bail to Accused No.1 ignoring certain materials on record which prima-facie sufficient to proceed against the Accused and thereby ought to have rejected the bail application filed by Accused No.1.

• It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, the alleged offences are heinous in nature and also the offence U/Sec.4 of the POCSO Act is prescribed for a punishment for life, that being so the Court below was not justified in granting bail to Accused No.1 when the case was still under investigation and charge sheet was yet to be filed.

• It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that, the victim girl is none else than the minor daughter of the complainant/petitioner and that the State has not sought for cancellation of bail order till today and hence petitioner has exhausted he