3 min readJun 30, 2026 02:11 PM IST
Noting that a trial court had overlooked crucial facts while granting bail to a man, accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl in a West Delhi school, within a week of his arrest, the Delhi High Court Monday cancelled the bail.
“The impugned order (lower court order) has missed the crux of the issue… as to why a minor child… would make such a complaint and would not only identify the respondent as the offender but also point out the place of occurrence… Therefore, in view of above discussions and in exercise of power under Section 528 of the BNSS Act 2023, the impugned order is set aside to secure ends of justice,” Justice Vinod Kumar said in his June 29 order.
The HC said it was “too early” to release the accused while ignoring the victim’s version, since the case was still under investigation.
“… The Additional Sessions Judge did not take into account a very important fact that in junior school, where the present incident took place, there were 10 staff members out of which only two officials were male i.e. one guard… and the respondent. Therefore, the child victim could not have made any mistake in identifying the culprit,” the court said, ordering the accused to surrender on July 1.
“Learned Additional Sessions Judge missed a very important fact that the victim is barely three years old and such a small child cannot be equated with an adult victim, who can narrate the facts in proper sequence with accuracy of time…”
“A child of such a tender age may appear to be incoherent and sometimes even illogical, but that does not mean that what a child is saying is incorrect… the victim narrated the incident to her mother without naming the respondent. Thereafter, she not only identified the respondent but also identified the place where the incident took place,” it added.
The alleged incident took place on April 30.
On May 7, a Sessions Court in Dwarka granted bail to the accused after noting that CCTV footage showed him leaving the junior wing of the school at 8.37 am and that the medical examination revealed no visible injuries.
Story continues below this ad
“While considering the application, learned trial court noted that footage retrieved from the CCTV camera depicted the respondent entering the passage leading towards the interior
portion of the school premises at 8.13 am and… returning at approximately 8.37 am. Learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that the footage did not indicate the presence of the applicant inside the Junior Wing beyond the said time and further noted the defence contention that in another footage, the respondent can be seen entering the Senior Wing school building shortly thereafter,” the HC order observed.
After the bail was granted, the Delhi Police represented by Additional Solicitor General S V Raju and Additional Public Prosecutor Aman Usman approached the HC.
Stay updated with the latest – Click here to follow us on Instagram