Delhi HC Cancels Bail of POCSO Accused School Caretaker in Janakpuri Assault Case

The Delhi High Court has cancelled the bail granted to a 57-year-old school caretaker, Lalit Kumar, accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a three-year-old nursery student under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. Justice Vinod Kumar held that the trial court had failed to adequately consider the child victim's consistent version of events and directed the accused to surrender before the POCSO court.

Facts of the Case

The incident came to light on May 1, 2026, when the mother of the three-year-old girl filed a complaint at the Janakpuri police station in west Delhi. She alleged that her daughter was sexually assaulted during school hours on April 30, the second day after the child's admission to the school. The accused, Lalit Kumar, worked as a caretaker at the private school. Despite strong opposition from the prosecution, a court in Dwarka granted bail to the accused on May 7, 2026.

Why the High Court Cancelled Bail

The Delhi High Court found several errors in the trial court's bail order. First, the trial court had rejected the child's statement because it appeared incoherent and illogical at points. The High Court disagreed, holding that a three-year-old child's incoherent or illogical statement does not mean it is incorrect. Young children lack the vocabulary and cognitive framework to narrate traumatic events in a structured manner, but this does not diminish the evidentiary value of their account. Second, the trial court had given weight to the absence of visible injuries on the child. The High Court rejected this reasoning, noting that the absence of external injuries cannot be used to discredit the victim's account in cases of sexual offences against children.

Punishment Under Section 6 POCSO Act

The prosecution argued that this was a clear case of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Following the 2019 amendment to the Act, this offence carries a minimum punishment of 20 years of rigorous imprisonment, which may extend to imprisonment for the remainder of the convict's natural life, along with a fine. In the most severe cases, the death penalty may also be imposed. Given the severity of the offence and the vulnerability of the victim, the High Court found that bail should not have been granted at this stage. Those tracking developments in criminal law and bail jurisprudence will note the increasing strictness of courts in POCSO matters.

Significance for POCSO Bail Applications

This judgment reinforces several important principles in POCSO jurisprudence. Trial courts must give appropriate weight to a child victim's statements, even when they appear fragmented or disjointed. The absence of medical evidence of injury does not disprove sexual assault. When the offence alleged is aggravated penetrative sexual assault carrying a minimum sentence of 20 years, courts must exercise extreme caution before granting bail. The accused has been directed to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO court. This order aligns with the broader trend of appellate courts correcting premature bail grants in serious criminal cases.

Related Reading

For more on recent criminal law developments, see the Allahabad HC ruling on delayed PoSH Act complaints. Also relevant is our coverage of plea bargaining under BNSS 2023.

Key Takeaways

1. The Delhi High Court cancelled bail of a school caretaker accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a three-year-old under the POCSO Act. 2. A young child's incoherent statement does not mean it is false. Courts must account for the child's age and cognitive abilities when evaluating testimony. 3. Absence of visible injuries on the victim does not disprove sexual assault and cannot be grounds to grant bail. 4. Section 6 of the POCSO Act (as amended in 2019) prescribes a minimum punishment of 20 years, extending to life imprisonment or death in the most severe cases. 5. Courts must exercise heightened caution in granting bail for POCSO offences given the severity of prescribed punishments.