Bail is the rule and jail is the exception. Pre-trial detention must not be punitive, and the constitutional right to a speedy trial necessitates granting bail when incarceration is prolonged and the trial's conclusion is not imminent, provided there is no risk of flight or evidence tampering.

JUDGMENT

KIRTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short- ‘BNSS’), is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in case FIR No.164 dated 15.06.2025, under Sections 74 , 75(2) and 332(c) of and Section 8 of POCSO Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Adampur, District Hisar.

2. The contents of the FIR are reproduced below:-

“To, SHO Sahib Police Station, Adampur (Hinsar). Application against Amit son of Jagdish alias Kaluram resident of village Adampur. Respected Sir, It is my humble request that I, the applicant Sundar Lal, son of Shri Kalu Ram, am resident of village Adampur, Tehsil Adampur, District Hisar and I am a labourer. That today on 15.06.2025, I had gone to my work as a labourer at around 09.00 am in the morning and my wife had gone to bring grass and at home my two daughters xxxxx, aged 15 years, xxxxx, aged around 17 years were alone. At around 9:45 a.m., I received a call from my neighbourers, informing me that Amit son of Jagdish alias Kaluram a resident of Village Adampur, had attempted to molest my daughter. When I returned home and asked my daughter what had happened, she said that after you left, she was lying on the bed watching television. At that very moment, our neighbourer, Amit son of Jagdish 2026.04.16 16:38 alias Kaluram a resident of Village Adampur came and lay down on me, grabbed me and attempted to rape me. He kissed me on the cheek and bit my lips. When I raised an alarm, my elder sister Sheetal came and rescued me. Hearing the noise, Amit fled away. I then called the police on Dial 112, and the police arrived at the scene. Amit has committed a heinous act. Therefore, I request that the strict legal action be taken against him and justice be done to my daughter. It would be a great kindness on your part. Thank you.

Date-15.06.2025. Sundar Lal”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of the statement of the father of the prosecutrix, alleging that the petitioner entered the house of the victim, caught hold of her, kissed her on cheek, bit her lips and thereafter ran away. It is submitted that there is no cogent evidence, medical or otherwise, on record that points towards the complicity of the petitioner. In fact, the prosecutrix had initially even refused to get herself physically examined. Moreover, even the material witnesses stand examined before the learned trial Court. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has already undergone an actual custody period of 09 months and 21 days.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She states that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel has filed custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 09 months and 21 days. Investigation is complete. She also submits that the charges have been framed on 13.03.2026 and out of a total of 20 prosecution witnesses, 04 have been examined.

5. Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

6. Before proceeding, a gainful reference can be made to the observations passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI , (2012) 1 SCC 40, relevant paras whereof reads thus:

"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object