Court Emphasizes Family Unity Over Prolonged Incarceration, Citing Victim's Desire for a Peaceful Married Life
In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted bail to Suneel Kumar, who was accused under Section 64(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The judgment, delivered by Justice Sandeep Sharma, considered the unique circumstances surrounding the case, highlighting the victim-prosecutrix's desire to maintain family unity.
Suneel Kumar was arrested in January 2026 after police were alerted by Civil Hospital Chowari about a minor girl brought in for childbirth. The ensuing investigation revealed that the victim-prosecutrix, a minor, had married Kumar and given birth to their child. The case was registered at Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh.
The court's decision was influenced by several factors, including the victim-prosecutrix's statement expressing her voluntary and consensual relationship with Kumar. Justice Sharma emphasized that the continuation of Kumar's detention would cause irreparable harm to the victim-prosecutrix and their newborn child, thus disrupting the familial unit.
In his judgment, Justice Sharma referenced several Supreme Court rulings, underscoring the principle of presumption of innocence and the notion that pre-trial detention should not be punitive. He pointed to the Supreme Court's decision in K. Kirubakaran v. State of T.N., where it was held that incarceration disrupting family life could lead to irreparable hardship.
The court acknowledged the gravity of the charges but opted for a compassionate approach, considering the practical implications of the victim-prosecutrix's circumstances. It was noted that the prosecution's case was unlikely to succeed given the victim-prosecutrix's testimony and the established marital relationship.
The conditions for Kumar's bail included a personal bond and local surety, attendance at trial, non-tampering with evidence, and restrictions on leaving the country without court permission. Justice Sharma clarified that the observations made were specific to the bail application and did not reflect on the case's merits.
This ruling marks a nuanced approach, balancing legal provisions with the socio-emotional aspects of the involved parties, and highlighting the court's role in delivering justice with empathy.
Bottom Line:
Bail granted to petitioner accused under Section 64(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 6 of the POCSO Act considering the peculiar facts of the case where victim-prosecutrix expressed her desire to live a peaceful married life with the petitioner, and incarceration would disrupt the familial unit and cause irreparable harm.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 64(2), Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 6
Suneel Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2876933
