Court emphasizes lack of consent and prosecutrix's age as critical factors in rejecting bail application
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has refused to grant bail to Wasim Akhtar, accused in a case involving charges under Section 64(1)/137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The case, registered under FIR No. 53/2025 at PS Karawal Nagar, involves allegations of sexual assault on a minor.
Presiding Judge Girish Kathpalia delivered the judgment on March 20, 2026, dismissing the bail application and emphasizing the prosecutrix's lack of consent and her age as crucial factors. The prosecutrix, identified as a 17-year-old girl at the time of the incident, provided a detailed account of the events. She stated that on February 14, 2025, the accused called her to the house of a woman under false pretenses. Upon arrival, the accused allegedly filled the parting of her hair with vermilion and kissed her. Despite her protests, he established sexual relations with her. The prosecutrix's brother subsequently called the police, leading to her medical examination.
During the hearing, counsel for the accused argued that the prosecutrix was over 18 years old and consented to the sexual relations. They further pointed out that the incident occurred on Valentine's Day, suggesting mutual consent. However, the prosecutrix's date of birth, confirmed as January 14, 2008, established her minority at the time of the incident.
The prosecution, assisted by Investigating Officer SI Neha, opposed the bail application, highlighting the prosecutrix's consistent support for the prosecution's case. The prosecutrix appeared in court to oppose the bail application, reinforcing her stance. The prosecution also presented a certificate from the MCD School, confirming her date of birth, and revealed that DNA evidence from the accused was found in the prosecutrix's vaginal swab.
Judge Kathpalia noted that mere friendship or the significance of Valentine's Day does not justify non-consensual sexual relations or actions such as filling a girl's hair parting with vermilion without her consent. The judge underscored the prosecutrix's firm stance in lodging the FIR and supporting the prosecution during the trial, demonstrating that the alleged incident occurred against her consent.
Considering the circumstances, the court concluded that granting bail at this stage was inappropriate. The judgment clarified that observations made should not prejudice either side in the trial's final stages. The court ordered that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Jail Superintendent for immediate conveyance to the accused.
The judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rights of minors and ensuring justice in cases involving allegations of sexual assault, particularly under the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act.
Bottom Line:
Bail application of accused charged under Section 64(1)/137(2) BNS and Section 4 of POCSO Act dismissed, emphasizing the prosecutrix's age and lack of consent as crucial factors.
Statutory provision(s): Section 64(1)/137(2) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act
Wasim Akhtar v. State (GNCT of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2869733
