The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has granted regular bail to a man accused under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act after taking note of the victim’s statement that she was in a consensual relationship with him and wished to marry him.
Justice Sandeep Sharma passed the order in Vikram Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh on May 15, 2026.
According to the prosecution, the case arose after a medical officer at Civil Hospital Dadahu informed the police on March 19, 2026 that a girl had been brought to the hospital for delivery. During inquiry, the police found that the girl’s date of birth was February 24, 2008, making her a minor at the time of the alleged incidents.
Read Also:- 0% Attendance Cannot Be Treated As Attendance Shortage: Delhi High Court
An FIR was thereafter registered at Police Station Renuka Ji under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner was arrested on March 20, 2026 and remained in custody since then.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and that the victim had voluntarily stayed with him. It was also submitted that after the birth of the child, the victim and the infant were residing at the petitioner’s house and both intended to marry.
The State opposed the bail plea, contending that the victim was admittedly a minor at the relevant time and that the allegations involved a serious offence under the POCSO Act.
The victim appeared before the High Court along with her parents and the petitioner’s mother. She told the Court that she had joined the petitioner’s company “of her own volition” and stated that the FIR was registered after the hospital informed the police during her delivery.
Read Also:- Husband Who Took Second Wife Cannot Claim Cruelty by First Wife: Rajasthan HC Dismisses Divorce Plea
She further stated that she did not wish to pursue the case and wanted to marry the petitioner while raising their child together.
The High Court noted that although the victim’s consent was legally immaterial because she was a minor at the time, the facts suggested that the relationship arose out of affection and not coercion.
“The Court finds that bail petitioner and victim-prosecutrix had prior acquaintance and they wanted to solemnize marriage,” the Bench observed while discussing the circumstances of the case.
Justice Sharma also referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in K. Kirubakaran v. State of T.N., where the apex court had observed that in certain cases involving relationships arising from “love and not lust,” continued incarceration could disrupt the family unit and adversely affect the victim and child.
The Court further observed that prolonged custody during trial would ultimately leave the victim alone to raise the child.
Allowing the petition, the High Court directed that Vikram Singh be released on regular bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 along with one local surety of the same amount. The Court also imposed standard conditions requiring him to cooperate with the investigation, attend trial proceedings, avoid influencing witnesses, and not leave India without permission of the trial court.
Case Title: Vikram Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Case Number: Cr.MP(M) No. 767 of 2026
Judge: Justice Sandeep Sharma
Decision Date: May 15, 2026
