In a bail application filed before the Delhi High Court seeking the grant of regular bail in a case arising out of a First Information Report (FIR) for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 64/64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 4/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), a Single Judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma denied bail to the applicant, considering the heinous nature of the offence alleged.
On 12-07-2024, information was received that a minor girl, aged around 14 years, was being made to work at a brothel near Ajmeri Gate, Delhi, and that an immediate rescue operation was required. The Investigating Officer (IO), along with his team, reached the spot and found the minor girl in the custody of the brothel in charge. The minor girl was rescued and shifted to the YWCA shelter home.
The minor girl disclosed that she had been brought to the brothel a few days ago by the applicant and underwent a medical examination. Thereafter, based on her statement, the said FIR was registered. The minor girl had lost both her parents and was sent to Delhi to work as a domestic help. During her stay, she developed a physical relationship with a man she came into contact with. Hence, the family for whom the minor girl used to work sent her back to her native village.
However, after a fight with her elder sister, the minor girl returned to Delhi and began residing at Tikona park where she was molested by many persons in lieu of providing her food. Thereafter, she came into contact with the applicant, who also had a physical relationship with her, but offered to arrange work for her by taking her to the brothel. The minor girl stated that she was forced to engage in sexual acts with multiple persons, and the person in charge retained the entire money earned by her.
The Court found that the allegations against the applicant were grave in nature since the material on record disclosed a specific and direct role of the applicant as he had sexually assaulted the minor girl on the pretext of providing her shelter and work, but instead had taken advantage by selling her to a brothel house owner, where she was used for paid sex. The Court stated that the minor girl’s statement was consistent, carrying significant value, and that the same could not be brushed aside while considering the prayer for bail.
Considering the most important fundamental right of an individual under Article 21, the Court held that while considering a bail application, a careful balance must be struck between the liberty of the accused and the larger interest of society. Thus, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in X v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 2026 INSC 44, the Court denied bail to the applicant and dismissed the application.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Md. Imran Siddiqui, Mr. Waiz Islam, Mohd. Akbar Khan, Md. Amaan Afsal
For Respondent – Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar (APP)
For Prosecutrix – Ms. Prachi Dubey (Amicus Curie)
