The Uttarakhand High Court has granted bail to an accused booked under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, holding that although the prosecutrix was legally a minor, the material on record indicated that she had voluntarily accompanied the applicant and was possessed of sufficient understanding, maturity, and discernment to comprehend the nature and consequences of her actions. Justice Alok Mahra, while allowing the bail application in BA1 No. 2403 of 2025, observed that the provisions of the POCSO Act are stringent in nature, but such rigour does not preclude the Court from exercising its discretionary jurisdiction to grant bail where the facts and circumstances of the case so warrant, in order to secure the ends of justice. The Court further noted that in cases involving young offenders and consensual relationships between adolescents, a liberal approach may be warranted at the stage of bail, so as to prevent the regressive and adverse influences of prolonged incarceration and to further the principle of best interest of both the parties involved.
The FIR was lodged on 08.07.2025 by the mother of the victim, alleging that the applicant had sexually assaulted her minor daughter. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the applicant under Sections 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act read with Section 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 88 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that at the time of the incident, the applicant was 23 years of age and the victim was above 16 years. They were having friendship and relations were made consensually, and this fact was also corroborated by the statement of the victim. The victim and the complainant had also been examined as PW1 and PW2, and the applicant was languishing in jail since 08.07.2025. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Varun Kumar Singh v. State, particularly paragraph nos. 23, 24, and 25 of the said judgment, to support the case for bail. Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application.
The Court observed that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita revealed that she had liking for the applicant and physical relations made between them were by the consent of the victim. It is no doubt true that under the purview of the POCSO Act, the prosecutrix is legally a minor; however, the facts of the present case reveal that she was possessed of sufficient understanding, maturity, and discernment to comprehend the nature and consequences of her actions, and that she had voluntarily joined the company of the applicant. It is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as various High Courts that, in cases involving young offenders and consensual relationships between adolescents, a liberal approach may be warranted at the stage of bail, so as to prevent the regressive and adverse influences of prolonged incarceration and to further the principle of best interest of both the parties involved. Considering the above facts and also considering the fact that the applicant and victim were having friendship and relations were made consensually which fact is corroborated by the statement of the victim and applicant is languishing in jail since 08.07.2025, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
The bail application was accordingly allowed, and the applicant was directed to be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. The order was pronounced on 27.04.2026.
Case Details:
Title: Tushar Sharma @ Tannu v. State of Uttarakhand
Case No.: BA1 No. 2403 of 2025
Coram: Justice Alok Mahra
Date of Judgment: 27.04.2026
Click HERE to Read the ORDER.
Lawcutor 