The Delhi High Court has set aside an order granting bail to a school caretaker accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a three-year-old nursery student in a Janakpuri school, holding that the trial court failed to properly appreciate material evidence and applied an erroneous approach at the stage of bail consideration.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Vinod Kumar on Monday exercised revisional jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, and found that the impugned order suffered from non-application of mind, particularly in relation to the gravity of allegations under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The Court observed that the trial court had failed to accord due weight to the victim’s consistent statement and her identification of the accused, as well as her ability to indicate the place of occurrence within the school premises. It held that at this prima facie stage, there was nothing on record suggesting any motive for false implication by a child of such tender age or by her parents, thereby warranting judicial caution in matters involving sexual offences against minors.
Setting aside the bail order, the High Court held that the trial court had erred in granting bail at a nascent stage of investigation, particularly when forensic examination reports, including FSL analysis of seized material and electronic evidence such as CCTV footage, were still awaited and investigation was ongoing.
The Court specifically noted that the trial court had placed undue reliance on selective aspects such as CCTV footage showing the accused leaving the junior wing at around 8:37 am, absence of visible external injuries in the medical examination, and the conclusion that custodial interrogation was no longer required, without holistically assessing the evidentiary matrix.
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on April 30 when the three-year-old victim, who had recently joined the school, returned home complaining of pain and later disclosed the alleged assault to her mother. During investigation, the child allegedly identified the school caretaker as the perpetrator and also pointed out the specific room within the school where the incident took place.
The Court emphasised that the evidentiary value of a child witness cannot be discarded merely on the ground that the victim is unable to narrate events with adult precision or structured chronology. It held that minor inconsistencies or lack of sequential clarity do not dilute the probative value of a child’s statement, particularly in offences under the POCSO Act, which recognise the vulnerability of child victims and mandate a child-sensitive approach.
The High Court further observed that the trial court failed to apply settled principles governing bail jurisprudence in serious offences, including consideration of the gravity of the offence, vulnerability of the victim, and the stage of investigation, which remain crucial parameters under criminal procedural law.
Relying on Supreme Court jurisprudence, including X v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Court reiterated that in POCSO matters, courts must give due weight to the statutory object of the legislation and the protective framework envisaged for child victims, while evaluating bail applications.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petitions filed by the State and the victim’s family, set aside the bail order, and directed the accused to surrender before the trial court on July 1.
The post Janakpuri POCSO case: Delhi High Court cancels bail of school caretaker, orders surrender appeared first on India Legal.