The court determined that bail was inappropriate due to the severity of allegations and potential witness tampering, especially in cases involving child victims.

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

03.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 4, 3(b) and 5(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in Crime No.7 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. This is a case of sexual harassment as defined under Section 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.02.2026. He would further submit that, in any event, further custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail.

4. The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, who submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 03.01.2026 and that the investigation is still pending. It was further submitted that, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of his tampering with witnesses. 5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the victim was only eight years old at the time of the occurrence, this Court is of the view that it is too premature to enlarge the petitioner on bail and that it would not be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.