Dismissed

Rohit v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC17 Jan 2026BAIL APPLN./2729/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble the Delhi HC dismissed the bail application of a 19-year-old accused facing charges of rape and POCSO for alleged penetrative assault on a seven-year-old child, citing fear of retaliation against the victim's family.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; accused ordered to remain in judicial custody.

What the court decided

Rohit Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 17.01.2026

¶4

- BAIL APPLN. 2729/2025 ROHIT .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Raja Panda, Advocate ( through videoconferencing ).

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with IO/SI Manisha.

¶8

Ms. Dakshaja Upadhyaya, Advocate for victim/prosecutrix

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶10

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶11

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.547/2023 of PS Maidan Garhi for offence under Section 323/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant as well as learned prosecutor assisted by Investigating Officer/SI Manisha. I have also heard learned counsel for prosecutrix.

¶13

Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is as follows. On 03.11.2023 at about 04:00pm, when the prosecutrix aged about seven years was alone at BAIL APPLICATION 2729/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages

¶14

Page 1 of 4 pages

¶15

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.01.17 16:13:25 -08'00'

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 7.01.2026 16:20:41

¶18

home as her mother had gone for work, the present accused/applicant, who was aged 19 years came to her home. The accused/applicant is cousin of the prosecutrix, being her father’s sister’s son. The accused/applicant committed anal intercourse forcibly with the prosecutrix and when she shouted, he left after telling her to take bath. When her mother returned home, the prosecutrix apprised her of the incident and on the same day, FIR was registered.

¶19

Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the accused/applicant is in judicial custody since 03.11.2023 and cannot be kept in jail endlessly. It is also contended that the forensic report of FSL favours the accused/applicant, since the DNA of accused/applicant could not be detected on the clothes of the prosecutrix. It is also contended that sister of the accused/applicant also lodged a complaint against father of the prosecutrix and the same was registered as FIR No. 549/2023 for offences under Section 354/506 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act on 04.11.2023. Learned counsel for accused/applicant also contends that father of the prosecutrix is a bad character of the area.

¶20

On the other hand, learned APP for State and learned counsel for the prosecutrix strongly oppose the bail application, contending that parents of the prosecutrix are yet to be examined by the trial court and grant of bail to the accused/applicant would lead to their being pressurized by him. In this regard, learned counsel for prosecutrix has taken me through ordersheets of the learned trial court annexed as Annexure-P7 (Colly) reflecting the serious

¶21

BAIL APPLICATION 2729/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages

¶22

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 7.01.2026 16:20:41

¶25

concern of parents of the prosecutrix who apprehend harm at his hands; even as regards delay in recording testimony of the prosecutrix, learned counsel for prosecutrix has taken me through records to show that she was under threat from family of the accused/applicant and the learned trial court even initiated the process as regards victim protection.

¶26

As regards FIR No. 549/2023, registered on the complaint of sister of the accused/applicant, as mentioned above, the same was registered subsequent to the FIR No. 547/2023 after the arrest of the accused/applicant. Further, even in FIR No. 549/2023, the release of father of the prosecutrix on bail does not give parity to the present accused/applicant, because in the said case there was no allegation of any penetrative assault. Moreover, the agony undergone by the female child of seven years cannot be allowed to be bartered by an act allegedly done by her father with someone else.

¶27

As regards the corroborative evidence, according to the prosecution case, after committing forcible anal intercourse, it is the accused/applicant who made the prosecutrix take bath, which could be the reason as regards FSL failure to detect DNA on her clothes. Rather, the medical documents of the prosecutrix who was examined by senior resident AIIMS reflect two tear injuries over posterior of anal region. Not only this, in her testimony as PW1, the prosecutrix has supported the prosecution case.

¶28

As mentioned above, parents of the prosecutrix are yet to be examined and the material on trial court record reflects reasonable apprehension in BAIL APPLICATION 2729/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages

¶29

Page 3 of 4 pages

¶30

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 7.01.2026 16:20:41

¶33

their mind that if released on bail, the accused/applicant would harm them.

¶34

Considering the overall circumstances described above, I do not find it a fit stage to release the accused/applicant on bail. Therefore, the bail application is dismissed.

¶35

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4 GIRISH 5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155 KATHPALIA 70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e2 6fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.01.17 16:12:39 -08'00'

¶36

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶37

JANUARY 17, 2026 ‘ rs’

¶38

BAIL APPLICATION 2729/2025

¶39

Page 4 of 4 pages

¶40

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 7.01.2026 16:20:41

Rohit v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Rohit v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sh. Abhishek @ Montu Vs the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

Osita Modestus Obi Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Vinod Kumar Aggarwal Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Jitender Bhati @ Happy through His Pairokar and Wife Ms Monika Jindal Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ajay Rajput Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Javed Ali & Anr. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.