The High Court finds the trial court's bail order flawed, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of the POCSO Act's gravity and presumption provisions.
In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has cancelled the bail granted to an accused in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The decision, delivered by Justice Bivas Pattanayak on March 2, 2026, highlights the trial court's failure to consider the gravity of the offenses and the statutory presumptions under the POCSO Act.
The case originated from a complaint lodged by the mother of a 14-year-old victim, accusing the respondent of sexual exploitation. Initially, the trial court had denied anticipatory bail and later regular bail, acknowledging the seriousness of the charges. However, in a turn of events, bail was granted on July 20, 2024, following the submission of the chargesheet. The High Court found this decision to be perverse, as it was based solely on the chargesheet submission without due consideration of the offense's severity and the victim's vulnerability.
The High Court underscored that the trial court ignored crucial factors such as the likelihood of evidence tampering and the presumption of guilt under Section 29 of the POCSO Act, which mandates that courts presume an accused's guilt unless proven otherwise once foundational facts are established. The High Court's decision emphasizes that the trial court must exercise discretion judiciously, considering the case's nature and societal impact.
The High Court directed the accused to surrender within ten days, warning of coercive actions if he failed to comply. This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding the POCSO Act's intent to protect children from sexual offenses and ensuring that bail decisions are not made lightly in such grave matters.
Bottom Line:
Bail - Cancellation of bail granted by trial court - Bail granted by trial court without considering the gravity of the offense under POCSO Act and relevant factors - Trial court failed to adhere to parameters required for granting bail in cases involving heinous and serious offenses - Bail order found to be perverse and unsustainable.
Statutory provision(s): Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 439(2), POCSO Act, 2012 Sections 6, 29, Indian Penal Code Section 376(3).
XXXX v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc id # 2860714
