1. Bail application for offences including kidnapping, rape, and under POCSO Act — minor victim. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 21921
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mini Pushkarna, J
VICKY @ VIKKY – Appellant
Versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. – Respondent
BAIL APPLN.-3253/2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Utsav Kumar, Medhavi Tyagi, Devender Kumar, Bikram Vishal Kumar, Laveena Tak, Akshay Sahay, Yash Gupta
For the Respondents: Sunil Kumar Gautam, Anushkaa Arora
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Utsav Kumar, Medhavi Tyagi, Devender Kumar, Bikram Vishal Kumar, Laveena Tak, Akshay Sahay, Yash Gupta
For the Respondents: Sunil Kumar Gautam, Anushkaa Arora
Granting bail in POCSO cases may consider mitigating factors like a documented romantic relationship, the comparative young age of the parties, and contradictory statements by the victim, even though legal consent is invalid for minors.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 368, 376, 328 and 34 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 6 and 21 - Bail application - Minor victim - Romantic relationship - Conflicting statements - Grant of bail. (Paras 1, 16, 17)
(B) Bail in POCSO cases - While consent of a minor is legally irrelevant, courts may factor in real-life considerations such as the comparative age of the accused and victim, the nature of their relationship, and any tacit approval-in-fact - Romantic involvement between adolescents can be a mitigating factor that tilts the balance in favor of the accused. (Paras 20, 21)
Facts of the case:
A minor left home and was subsequently recovered. Initially, the minor stated she had left out of anger and had no complaints against anyone. Later, a supplementary statement was made alleging sexual assault by the accused. Evidence from social media indicated a romantic relationship between the parties prior to the incident. The accused has been in custody for over three years.
Findings of Court:
The victim provided contradictory statements. Medical and forensic evidence did not fully corroborate the allegation of intoxication. DNA profiling of a seized blanket showed a mixed profile, but no male DNA was found in the victim's swabs. The age difference between the parties was relatively small.
Issues: Whether the accused is entitled to bail considering the nature of the offense under the POCSO Act versus mitigating factors including the romantic relationship, the victim's initial statement, and the duration of custody.
Ratio Decidendi: The court observed that the romantic relationship and the victim's initial categorical statement that she left home of her own accord and had no complaints are significant mitigating factors. Given the young age of both parties and the length of judicial custody, the balance tilts toward the grant of bail. (Paras 20-22)
Result: Bail application allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- crime and sentencing
- practice and procedure
Table of Contents
2. Defence argued consensual love affair and lack of medical evidence; prosecution opposed citing gravity and POCSO Act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 )
3. Victim gave contradictory statements; romantic relationship evidenced by social media posts. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 )
4. Consensual teenage relationship, minor age difference, and lengthy custody mitigate for bail under POCSO Act. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 )
5. Bail granted on personal bond with conditions, including regular reporting and no contact with witnesses. (Para 23 , 24 )
6. What factors mitigate for grant of bail in POCSO Act cases involving teenage relationships?
Consensual appearance, victim's inconsistent statements, young age, no criminal antecedents, and long incarceration are mitigating factors. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 )
7. Is a minor's consent relevant for bail consideration under the POCSO Act?
Consent is irrelevant for the offence, but evidence of romantic involvement and tacit approval are mitigating factors for bail. (Para 13 , 20 , 21 )
8. How are inconsistent victim statements treated in bail decisions for POCSO cases?
Inconsistent initial denials and later allegations of sexual assault are material factors scrutinized, weighing towards bail. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 20 )
1. The present is the third regular bail application filed by the applicant, i.e., Sh. Vicky S/o Sh. Mukesh, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), in connection with FIR No. 381/2023, dated 29th July, 2023, registered at Police Station (“PS”) Aman Vihar, Rohini, Delhi, under Sections 363/368/376/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”) and Sections 6/21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO Act”).
2. In the present case, the FIR came to be registered on 29th July, 2023, pursuant to the missing complaint made by the father of the victim about his missing daughter, i.e., the victim. Subsequently, a Chargesheet came to be filed by the Police against the applicant under Sections 363/368/376/328/34 of the IPC and 6/21 of the POCSO Act.
3. The brief facts of the present case, as emerging from the said Chargesheet, are as follows:
3.1. The complainant, i.e., father of the victim, in the present FIR, alleged that his minor daughter, i.e., the victim, on 28th July, 2023, left for school at around 07:00 AM and had not returned since.
3.2. During the course of investigation, on 30th July, 2023, the victim was traced and was brought to the PS, along with the complainant. The counselling of the victim was conducted in the PS and her statement was recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, in presence of a counsellor.
3.3. The victim, in her statement, stated that on 28th July, 2023, pursuant to a scolding by her mother, she had left her home in anger on the pretext of going to school, but, in reality, she went to the house of her maternal aunt. She requested her aunt not to tell anyone about her being there. Furthermore, she stated that she had no complaint against anyone and no one had done anything wrong to her. During the course of investigation, before the Trial Court, the victim stated that she had gone to her friend’s place and further stated that she had no complaint to be made against anyone.
3.4. However, on 31st July, 2023, the victim along with the complainant came to the PS and stated that one Sh. Vicky, i.e., the applicant, had kept her without her will and had sexual intercourse with her against her will.
3.5. The victim was sent to Sanjay Gandhi Memorial (“SGM”) Hospital, Mangolpuri, Delhi, where the medical examination of the victim was conducted vide MLC 234/2023. In the said MLC, it was stated that the victim knew the applicant since 08 months, and that on 29th July, 2023, she wilfully went with the applicant to his friend’s house. The victim was served some tea, whereafter, she lost her consciousness. After regaining her consciousness, which as per her was after one day, she found herself locked in a room. Subsequently, the applicant approached the victim and abused her without her will, and on protests, the applicant put a handkerchief on her face and she again lost her consciousness.
3.6. Upon regaining consciousness, she found herself in a vulnerable state and with pain in her lower abdomen along with both legs. She also noticed an abrasion on her right calf, which pained. She then raised alarm, pursuant to which the applicant along with his friend and his wife fled the scene, leaving the victim locked in the room. Subsequently, on 30th July, 2023, the victim was found by the police.
3.7. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested on 14th August, 2023, and was sent to Judicial Custody after being produced before the Magistrate.
3.8. The site plan of the room, i.e., the place of incident, was prepared and, at the instance of the victim, a blanket was seized and sealed by the police from the place of incident. The age proof of the victim was also verified and her date of birth was confirmed as 12th November, 2008, as per which, she was 14 years 08 months old at the time of the incident in question.
4. During the course of investigation, exhibits were deposited in Forensic Science Laboratory (“FSL”), Rohini, Delhi. After receiving the
