Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Criminal LawDelhi High Court

Amit vs. State (NCT of Delhi)

Bail Application · 2026:DHC:8740Decided 5 Oct 2026New Delhi Bench
BAIL APPLN. 2740/2026CNR: DLHC010307312026
Justice Mini Pushkarna

Background

A complaint was filed in March 2026 that a 17-year-old girl had gone missing. Police later traced her to the applicant's native place in Uttar Pradesh, but the applicant himself could not be found there. The applicant had been in custody since April 2026, and a chargesheet had been filed. The victim's later statements, recorded under the BNSS, said she had gone willingly and was in a relationship with the applicant.

Decision Breakdown

The applicant argued that the two were in a relationship and that he was about 18 when the incident happened. The Public Prosecutor had no serious objection to bail, and the complainant did not oppose it. The Court noted the victim's statements that she was not coerced and had gone with the applicant of her own accord, and it stated that although a minor's consent has no legal bearing, the fact of a consensual relationship should still be taken into account when deciding bail. The Court held that keeping the applicant in custody despite those statements would not be appropriate, and it granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety, subject to conditions including reporting to the police station every Monday.

Lesson Learnt

Under the POCSO Act, a minor's consent does not make the offence lawful, but courts still weigh the surrounding circumstances when deciding whether to grant bail. Bail in such cases still comes with strict reporting and reappearance conditions.

Amit vs. State (NCT of Delhi) – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware