Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application details and initial facts. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. pocso act's intent and importance. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. risks of granting bail and child well-being. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. bail request denial and case merits noted. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. The petitioner seeks bail in FIR No. 558/2021 dated 30.08.2021 registered at Police Station Prashant Vihar for offences under Section 354 , 354A IPC read with Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
2. The brief facts leading to the present case are as follows:-
i. The FIR was registered on the complaint of the prosecutrix, who is 16 years of age. It is stated that the prosecutrix resides with her parents and she used to take Mathematics classes from the petitioner since 10th Standard. It is stated that she is now in 11th Standard and offline classes begun on 29.08.2021.
ii. It is stated that on the first day of her offline class, the petitioner asked her to stay back to understand the concept taught on the previous day. He gave his notebook and went to take classes for 10th Standard. It is stated that
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
