The Supreme Court of India recently overruled a Rajasthan High Court order that had granted bail to a man convicted under the POCSO Act. The case involved a minor girl who accused the respondent of sexual assault at gunpoint. The apex court emphasized the gravity of the offense and the procedural lapses in granting bail.
Case Background
The appeal was filed by the father of the minor girl, challenging the Rajasthan High Court’s order dated 3rd September 2024, which suspended the sentence of the accused, Respondent No. 2. The convict had been sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act and was also fined ₹50,000. However, after serving only 1 year and 3 months, the High Court had granted him bail during the pendency of the appeal.
Read also:- Supreme Court Hears High Court Judge's Plea Against In-House Procedure for Removal
High Court’s Reasoning Questioned
"No signs of sexual assault were found by the medical expert... no DNA or FSL report was available... it was hard to believe the girl went outside despite washrooms at home."
This was part of the High Court’s reasoning to grant bail. However, the Supreme Court found this justification insufficient and speculative. The apex court held that the High Court failed to consider essential factors required under Section 389 of the CrPC before suspending the sentence of a convict in a serious offence.
The trial court had relied heavily on the testimony of the prosecutrix, who narrated the incident in detail. She stated that the accused took her to a nearby house at gunpoint and raped her. The court had also considered medical evidence, school records, and birth certificate confirming the girl's age as 14 years and 3 months.
Read also:- 13 Judges Challenge SC's Administrative Authority Over High Courts
Despite the absence of visible injuries and pending FSL reports, the trial court held that the lack of such evidence didn’t weaken the case. It applied the presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act to validate the conviction.
Criminal Background of the Accused
The State submitted an affidavit listing 11 criminal cases involving the accused, including offenses under the Arms Act and IPC. Out of these, 5 resulted in acquittal and 6 are still pending.
"The High Court did not consider any relevant factor under Section 389 CrPC... such reasoning for bail in heinous crimes is completely untenable."
Read also:- Patna High Court Quashes Dismissal Order of Social Welfare Officer Over Flawed Inquiry Process
The Supreme Court cited earlier judgments, reinforcing that post-conviction bail should be granted only in exceptional cases where there is palpable evidence suggesting the conviction may not be sustainable. The Court also dismissed the argument that bail should not be revoked due to lack of post-bail misconduct.
Importantly, the State revealed that the pending FSL report had later confirmed the presence of the accused's DNA on the victim’s clothes, further strengthening the prosecution’s case.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court’s bail order. It directed Respondent No. 2 to surrender before the POCSO court in Karauli, Rajasthan, by 30th August 2025, failing which the State was instructed to take him into custody.
"Observations made herein are only for the purpose of setting aside the order of suspension of sentence."
Case Title: Jamnalal vs. State of Rajasthan and Another
