Supreme Court Holds That Bail Granted in Heinous POCSO Offences Must Be Cancelled When Material Evidence Is Ignored and Victim Safety Is Jeopardised

Case Name: X v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Citation: 2026 INSC 44
Date of Judgment/Order: 09 January 2026
Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan

Held: The Supreme Court held that bail granted to an accused in a case involving aggravated penetrative sexual assault and gang rape of a minor under the POCSO Act is liable to be cancelled where the High Court ignores the gravity of the offence, statutory presumptions, victim’s statements, medico-legal evidence, and the likelihood of intimidation, rendering the bail order manifestly perverse and resulting in miscarriage of justice.

Summary: The appeal arose from an order of the Allahabad High Court granting bail to the accused in a case registered for offences under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act, alleging repeated sexual assault, armed intimidation, abduction, and recording of the acts against a 14-year-old minor. The Supreme Court examined the FIR, statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, educational records establishing minority, the medico-legal examination report, and the chargesheet already filed prior to grant of bail. It found that the High Court had failed to consider material evidence, relied on irrelevant factors such as alleged delay and speculative doubts about age, and overlooked the statutory rigour applicable to POCSO offences and the real apprehension of post-bail intimidation, thereby vitiating the exercise of discretion.

Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned bail order dated 09.04.2025 was set aside, the bail granted to the accused was cancelled, and the accused was directed to surrender before the jurisdictional court within two weeks, with directions to secure custody in accordance with law and to expedite the trial, and with all pending applications disposed of.