POCSO Convict's Bail Canceled: Supreme Court Underscores Proper Legal Scrutiny.


06 August 2025 POCSO >> Criminal Law  

In a significant ruling of Jamnalal v/s State of Rajasthan & Another, the Supreme Court has set aside a Rajasthan High Court order that had suspended the sentence and granted bail to a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The man, identified as Respondent No. 2, had been sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for an offense against a minor girl, but the High Court suspended his sentence after he served only 1 year and 3 months.

The father of the victim, the appellant in this case, challenged the High Court's decision. The Supreme Court, after reviewing the matter, found that the High Court's reasoning for granting bail was flawed and lacked a proper assessment of the relevant legal principles.

 
 

The High Court's decision was based on several points, including:

  • No signs of sexual assault were found by the medical expert.
  • FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) and DNA reports were not available.
  • The court found it "difficult to digest" that the victim would go to a field to defecate when washrooms were available.
  • The court also noted the unlikelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future.
The Supreme Court, however, systematically dismantled these arguments. It pointed out that:
  • The absence of a conclusive medical opinion does not automatically negate the victim's testimony, which the trial court found consistent and credible.
  • The Trial Court had already addressed the missing FSL report, noting that such evidence is corroborative and its absence does not adversely affect the prosecution's case when other evidence is strong.
  • The High Court's reasoning about the victim going to the field was "conjectural."
Furthermore, the Supreme Court highlighted a critical distinction between setting aside a bail order and canceling it. While cancellation is based on a convict's misconduct after being released, setting aside an order is about the legal and factual soundness of the initial decision to grant bail. The Court also considered the convict's criminal history, which included 11 past cases, with 6 still pending.

The Supreme Court concluded that the High Court's decision to suspend the sentence and grant bail was not justified, especially for a heinous crime under the POCSO Act. It set aside the High Court's order and directed the convict to surrender by August 30, 2025.


  Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012