The court rejected the bail plea of Solanki Ankuben Jitendrakumar, accused of facilitating the sexual exploitation of a minor, citing risk of evidence tampering and misuse of liberty.
In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court has denied the bail application of Solanki Ankuben Jitendrakumar, who stands accused of facilitating and abetting the sexual exploitation and trafficking of a minor under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, along with charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The judgment was delivered by Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar on July 13, 2026.
The court was hearing the regular bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The applicant, Solanki Ankuben Jitendrakumar, sought bail on the grounds of being falsely implicated and having already spent significant time in custody since her arrest on January 29, 2026. The defense argued that the charge sheet had been filed and no further recovery was needed from the accused.
The prosecution opposed the bail plea, highlighting the serious nature of the allegations. It was contended that the accused was the mastermind behind the exploitation, as a 10-year-old victim was allegedly subjected to flesh trade at the applicant's residence. The prosecution further argued that the victim’s statement, recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, confirmed the involvement of the applicant in the crimes.
The court emphasized the gravity of the offenses, noting that the filing of a charge sheet did not diminish the seriousness of the allegations. It upheld the presumption under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, which are applied to such cases. Justice Suthar noted that granting bail could lead to potential tampering with evidence and misuse of liberty, which would be detrimental to the prosecution's case.
In its ruling, the court reiterated the objective of the POCSO Act, which aims to protect children from sexual offenses and ensure their safe development. The court stressed the societal obligation to safeguard children's rights and dignity, underscoring that merely being a female accused does not warrant bail when the charges involve severe crimes against minors.
The court also referred to the Supreme Court’s precedent in Virupakshappa Gouda vs. State of Karnataka, reinforcing that the filing of a charge sheet signifies sufficient material collected by the investigation, and thus, does not weaken the prosecution's case.
The court concluded that the nature of the offenses, involving the exploitation of a minor, warranted the continued detention of the accused to ensure the integrity of the trial process. The application for bail was thus dismissed, with directions for the trial court to expedite proceedings given the applicant’s status as an undertrial prisoner.
Bottom line:-
Regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) was denied to a female accused involved in facilitating and abetting heinous crimes under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Solanki Ankuben Jitendrakumar v. State of Gujarat, (Gujarat) : Law Finder Doc id # 2941897
