The Delhi High Court has set aside the bail granted to a school caretaker accused of sexually assaulting a three-year-old nursery student inside the basement of a junior school in Janakpuri. Justice Vinod Kumar held that the trial court had overlooked crucial facts while granting bail, including the child's identification of the accused and the limited pool of male staff present at the school that day.
The accused has now been directed to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO court on 1st July 2026.
Background of the Case
The case relates to an incident that allegedly took place on 30th April 2026, when the minor victim, enrolled just two days earlier in nursery class, was dropped off at school by her mother. Later that day, after returning home and waking from a nap, the child began crying and pointed to her private part, complaining of pain.
She told her mother that a "bada sa ladka" at school had taken her downstairs and touched her private part, causing pain and bleeding. The mother dialled emergency helpline 112 the same night, leading to registration of an FIR at Janakpuri Police Station under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
The next day, the child identified the caretaker at the police station as the person who had taken her to the basement. Investigators later found that around 64 CCTV cameras on the school premises were not working at the relevant time, though a working portable camera showed the accused entering the passage leading to the junior wing at around 8:13 AM and exiting at 8:37 AM.
The accused was arrested the same evening. He was granted regular bail by the Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), Dwarka Courts, on 7th May 2026 just a week after his arrest.
The Additional Sessions Judge had relied mainly on the CCTV footage showing the accused leaving the junior wing around 8:37 AM and entering the senior wing soon after. The trial court also noted that the medical report showed no injury or redness on the child's body, and that the accused had cooperated with the investigation and posed no flight risk.
What the High Court Observed
The High Court disagreed with this reasoning. Justice Kumar noted that out of ten staff members at the junior school, only two were male the accused and a security guard making the child's identification significant. The court observed that the victim, being barely three years old, cannot be expected to narrate events with the precision of an adult, and incoherence in a child's account does not mean the account is false.
The bench also pointed out that the child had described the incident to her mother before naming anyone, and only later identified both the accused and the location of the alleged assault something the High Court felt the trial court had not adequately weighed.
On the absence of visible injuries, the court held this could not by itself rule out the prosecution's case, especially with the investigation, including the forensic science laboratory report, still pending.
Referring to a recent Supreme Court ruling on a similar POCSO bail matter, the High Court reiterated that absence of medical corroboration alone cannot be the deciding factor in cases involving the statutory protections meant for child victims.
The Decision
Setting aside the trial court's order, Justice Kumar ruled that the bail had been granted prematurely, while the investigation was still at a crucial stage.
The High Court allowed both petitions filed by the State and by the victim's mother and directed the accused to surrender before the POCSO court by 2:00 PM on 1st July 2026.
Case Details
Case Title: State v. Lalit Kumar & Connected Matter
Judge: Justice Vinod Kumar
Decision Date: June 29, 2026
-300x169.webp)
 Department-300x169.webp)
