The safety of the victim and purity of trial should be paramount considerations for considering bail applications under the Protection of children from sexual offences (Pocso) Act, the Supreme Court said in a judgment passed on Friday as it cancelled the bail of an accused in a 2024 gangrape case.
Deciding on an appeal filed by the victim, who was 16 years old at the time of the incident, a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan said that the Allahabad high court’s April 2025 order granting bail was “manifestly perverse” as it failed to note the threat to the safety of the victim who resided in the same locality as that of the accused.
“In offences involving sexual assault against children, the likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses constitutes a grave and legitimate concern. The safety of the victim and the need to preserve the purity of the trial process assume paramount importance,” the bench said.
The top court noted that the offences alleged were heinous and grave, involving repeated penetrative sexual assault upon a minor victim committed under armed intimidation and accompanied by recording of the acts for the purpose of blackmail. “Such conduct has a devastating impact on the life of the victim and shakes the collective conscience of society,” said justice Mahadevan, writing the judgment for the bench.
The girl was allegedly gangraped by four people in Uttar Pradesh’s Shamli district on December 1, 2024. A first information report (FIR) in the case was lodged at the Shamili police station the next day.
The court was dealing with the bail granted to one of the accused by the Allahabad high court on April 9, 2025. The bail came months after the accused was arrested on January 3, 2025, which was cited by the minor victim to suggest that the accused’s family wielded influence in the locality.
The counselling report of the Child Welfare Committee established that the victim was under fear and psychological distress. “The post-release presence of the accused gives rise to a real and imminent apprehension of intimidation and further trauma to the victim,” the judgment said. “In the present case, the grant of bail by the high court is vitiated by material misdirection and nonconsideration of relevant factors rendering the same manifestly perverse.”
The high court order had relied on past Supreme Court decisions on prolonged incarceration and delayed trial to grant bail. But, it failed to consider the nature and gravity of the offences and the statutory rigour under the provisions of the Pocso Act, the top court said.
“The omission to notice that the charge sheet had already been filed, coupled with the prima facie material emerging from the victim’s statements renders the exercise of discretion by the high court manifestly erroneous. The high court failed to apply the settled parameters governing the grant of bail, including the gravity of the offence, the vulnerability of the victim and the likelihood of witness intimidation,” the court said.
Holding these infirmities in the high court order to be “serious”, the verdict cannot be sustained in law and is accordingly set aside, the bench ruled and directed the accused to surrender within two weeks.
The court further directed the trial court to give priority to the present case and conclude proceedings as expeditiously as possible as it said, “Pocso Act is a beneficial legislation enacted to protect children from sexual offences and proceedings under the said Act warrant prompt and sensitive handling,” the bench said.
The accused argued that the allegations against him were borne from personal animosity as he had a consensual relationship with the victim. The court refused to be persuaded by this as the case involved the friends of the accused who sexually assaulted her, and the grievous nature of the offence were “prima facie” established by the victim’s statement and the medico-legal examination report.
The charge sheet in the case was filed in February 2025 by the Uttar Pradesh Police under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Pocso Act, including sections 5(1) and 6 of POCSO concerning “aggravated penetrative sexual assault of minor more than once” which is punishable with death sentence or life term.