The court affirmed that while the victim must be informed of bail proceedings under the POCSO Act, they are not required to be included as a party to such applications, promoting their rights to representation.

ORDER :

1. The applicant has filed the present bail application being aggrieved against the order dated 12.09.2025 passed by Learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.1, Hanumangarh whereby the bail application filed by the applicant has been rejected.

2. The office has pointed out the defect regarding non-impleadment of the informant/victim as a party in the application.

3. Upon the objection so raised, learned counsel for the applicant has filed an application praying for waiving of the defect and asserted that in present case the victim was 16 years and 7 months of age, as on the date of incident, and the case in hand is not a case of gang rape, neither allegations of offence punishable under Section 65 or Section 70 (2) of BNS 2023 have been levelled against the applicant and, therefore, as per Section 483 of BNSS, there is no requirement of impleading the victim, her guardian or informant as a party to the present bail application.

4. The issue specifically raised for consideration is “as to whether the victim/child or her guardian/parents or person in whom the child has trust and confidence is mandatorily required to be impleaded as a party respondent in cases under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012, more particularly in bail applications.”

5. Learned counsel for the applicant asserted that the issue in hand has already been decided by Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Criminal Reference No. 1/2023 “Pooja Gurjar & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan” decided on 19.12.2023, while dealing with provisions of Section 439 (1A) of Cr.P.C.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the Division Bench while considering the provisions of Section 439 (1A) Cr.P.C. as well as Sections 437 to 439 Cr.P.C. has dealt with the issue and held that there is no requirement of impleading the victim as a party to the proceedings, and has emphasized that the victim has a right of audience at every stage of proceedings but there is no requirement of impleading her/him as a party respondent in bail applications under Sections 437, 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. He further assertted that the judgment of “ Jagjeet Singh v. Aashish Mishra ” reported in 2022(9) SCC Page 321 mandating right of hearing to the victim has been considered and dealt with by the Division Bench in the case of Pooja Gurjar (Supra) and thereafter gave the conclusive finding. He thus asserted that there is no requirement of impleading the victim or his/her guardian as a party respondent. He thus prayed for over-ruling of the defect pointed out by the office.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor asserted that impleadment of the victim or her guardian/parents as per Rule 4(13) & Rule (15) of the POCSO Rules 2020, is necessary.

Analysis and Reasoning:-

8. As far as the rights of a victim are concerned, initially there was no specific provision under the Cr.P.C. with rega