Topic
Allahabad High Court grants bail in POCSO case, emphasizing victim's free will statement and lack of radiological age proof, despite minor pregnancy.
Rajasthan High Court rules that trial courts must prioritize and conclusively determine a victim's age under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act before proceeding with POCSO cases, ensuring compliance with statutory safeguards. The directive mandates recording the victim's statement within 30 days, failing which legal measures must be employed to secure attendance.
Patna High Court rules that an exonerating victim statement under BNSS Section 183, coupled with a seven-day unexplained delay in FIR registration, shifts the evidentiary burden, making arrest unjustified without stronger proof. The ruling reinforces that anticipatory bail is not automatic even in serious offences if the prosecution's case lacks credibility.
Rajasthan High Court grants bail in a POCSO case, emphasizing that prolonged custody is unjustified when the victim admits to a friendship with the accused and prosecution evidence is weak. The ruling underscores that bail should not be denied automatically, especially when trial delays are anticipated, setting a precedent for evaluating victim statements in POCSO bail applications.
Allahabad HC granted bail in a kidnapping case after the victim's statements under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. contradicted the FIR, affirming that pre-trial liberty must prevail when evidence undermines the prosecution's case. The ruling underscores the judiciary's duty to prevent wrongful incarceration where victim testimony does not support the allegations.
Allahabad High Court rules that re-recording of statements under Section 183 BNSS is permissible only in exceptional circumstances, not as a routine procedure.