Court Emphasizes Betrayal of Trust and Vulnerability of Minors, Rejects Bail Plea Despite Petitioner’s Claims of Procedural Lapses
Shillong, August 14, 2026 — The Meghalaya High Court today refused bail to Shri Adino Marboh, who stands accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court observed that the petitioner’s alleged actions constituted a grave betrayal of trust towards vulnerable children residing in a children’s home managed by his daughter and son-in-law.
The case originated from an FIR filed on January 17, 2026, following directions by the Child Welfare Committee, East Khasi Hills District. The petitioner was arrested on January 18, 2026, and charged under Sections 9(o)(p)/10 of the POCSO Act. The investigation revealed statements from multiple children residing in the children’s home “Ki Mawlynnai ka Jingim,” which portrayed disturbing accounts of molestation and sexual assault by the petitioner.
During the bail hearing, Shri Adino Marboh’s counsel argued that the arrest violated fundamental rights under Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution due to alleged non-intimation of arrest grounds at the time of detention. The petitioner also contended that the charges were unsubstantiated and that continued judicial custody was unwarranted post-charge-sheet filing, invoking the principle that “bail is the rule, jail the exception.”
However, the court found the state’s counter-arguments convincing. Evidence on record confirmed that the grounds for arrest were duly communicated to the accused in the Khasi language in the presence of reliable witnesses at the Women Police Station, Shillong. Moreover, the court highlighted that the petitioner had filed multiple bail applications previously without raising this procedural issue, thus waiving this right.
The court further stressed the unique facts of the case, noting the petitioner’s position of trust as a grandfather figure (“paieid”) to the children, which was egregiously violated. The survivor’s ongoing trauma was underscored by medical reports indicating psychological distress requiring weekly counseling sessions.
Given the strong prima facie evidence of sexual assault and molestation and the seriousness of the offense under the POCSO Act, the court declined to grant bail, stating that such misconduct could not be condoned even conditionally at this stage. The judgment reiterates the judiciary’s commitment to protecting minors and ensuring that those accused of such offenses face trial without premature release.
The petitioner’s bail plea has been dismissed as devoid of merit, and the trial will proceed with the examination of prosecution witnesses underway.
Bottom Line:
Bail application under POCSO Act - Bail denied due to strong prima facie evidence of sexual assault and molestation - Court emphasized the importance of trust and the vulnerability of children under the accused's care.
Statutory provision(s):
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 9(o)(p)/10, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 115, Constitution of India Articles 21, 22(2)
Shri. Adino Marboh v. State of Meghalaya, (Meghalaya) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2961593
