The Delhi High Court POCSO teacher bail case took a significant turn after the Delhi High Court cancelled the bail granted to a school teacher accused of concealing the sexual assault of a three-year-old student. Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the trial court overlooked crucial evidence and failed to consider the risk of witness tampering. The Court directed the accused teacher to surrender before the trial court within three days.
High Court Sets Aside Trial Court’s Bail Order
Justice Saurabh Banerjee quashed the trial court’s order granting regular bail.
The Court found that the lower court relied mainly on the fact that the child did not initially mention the teacher’s name. However, during the investigation, the child later identified the teacher and described her physical appearance.
The High Court held that the trial court failed to properly assess the available evidence before granting bail.
Court Finds Key Factors Were Ignored
The High Court observed that the case involved serious allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
It also noted that the teacher had worked at the school for 13 years. According to the Court, this long association could allow the accused to influence witnesses or interfere with the investigation.
Justice Banerjee concluded that the trial court failed to consider these important factors.
Teacher Directed to Surrender
The High Court also questioned the speed at which the trial court granted bail.
The teacher secured regular bail only six days after her arrest. After reviewing the record, the Court found no valid reason for such an early release.
Accordingly, the Court cancelled the bail and directed the accused to surrender before the Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Court) at Dwarka Courts within three days.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a challenge to a May 20 bail order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge at Dwarka Courts.
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on April 30. The three-year-old child returned home from school complaining of severe pain.
She told her mother that a “bada sa ladka” had taken her downstairs and inserted a finger into her private parts.
The police later arrested a 57-year-old school clerk-caretaker in connection with the alleged assault. The Delhi High Court had previously cancelled his bail in separate proceedings.
Allegations Against the Teacher
During the investigation, the child made additional statements regarding the teacher’s role.
She alleged that the class teacher took her to the basement after the assault. The teacher allegedly removed the child’s clothes, cleaned the bloodstains, and offered her sweets.
These allegations formed the basis of the prosecution’s claim that the teacher attempted to conceal the offence.
Representation Before the High Court
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, along with advocate Aman Usman, appeared for the State.
Senior Advocate K.K. Manan represented the accused teacher. He appeared with advocates M.S. Bammi, Uditi Bali, Nida Akhtar, Manish Kumar, and K.S. Choudhary.
Significance of the Ruling
The Delhi High Court POCSO teacher bail ruling highlights that courts must carefully evaluate evidence before granting bail in serious offences involving children. It also reinforces that the possibility of witness tampering and the gravity of allegations remain key considerations under the POCSO Act.
