Supreme Court refuses to stay Delhi High Court order cancelling bail of teacher in Janakpuri school POCSO case

The Supreme Court has refused to stay the Delhi High Court's order cancelling regular bail for a teacher co-accused in the sexual assault of a three-year-old student at a Janakpuri school, directing her to surrender immediately

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to stay the Delhi High Court’s order cancelling the bail granted to a woman teacher co-accused in the alleged sexual assault of a three-year-old girl student at a private school in Delhi’s Janakpuri.

A Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale declined to grant interim relief to the accused, Kriti Sahni, directed her to surrender in terms of the Delhi High Court’s order, and issued notice on her plea challenging the cancellation of bail.

---

As per the case status reflected on the Supreme Court’s official website, notice has been issued in the matter, which is tentatively likely to be listed on July 27.

Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court had set aside the trial court’s May 20 order granting regular bail to the accused teacher in the case registered at Janakpuri Police Station under Sections 64(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 6, 17 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Allowing the prosecution’s petition, a single-judge Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee had directed the accused to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO court within three days.

The Delhi High Court observed that in cases involving sexual offences against children, courts must give due weight to the “grave physical, emotional, mental and psychological harm” suffered by victims and added that such matters warrant “utmost care, attention and caution”, particularly while considering bail.

Referring to the facts of the case, the High Court said the trial court was conscious that “any three-year-old girl child… cannot be expected to reveal all/each and every detail at the time of making the initial complaint”, yet proceeded to grant bail primarily because the victim had not named the teacher in the FIR and disclosed her role only later in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

“The victim has not only disclosed the name of the respondent but also identified her later at the time of video-recorded identification proceedings,” the High Court had said.

It further held that the trial court ignored crucial facts, including the child’s subsequent identification of the teacher and the recovery of a blood-stained tissue paper and a piece of bedsheet during the investigation.

The Delhi High Court also said the trial court wrongly assessed the credibility of the victim’s version at the stage of bail despite the settled legal position that the veracity of a victim’s statement is not to be examined while deciding a bail application.

Justice Banerjee further observed that the accused had been teaching at the same school for the last 13 years and held a position of authority, observing that there was a likelihood of her influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence when the investigation was still at a nascent stage.

Setting aside the bail order, the Delhi High Court on July 15 directed the accused teacher to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO court within three days.

According to the prosecution, the three-year-old victim, who had joined the nursery class at a private school in Janakpuri on April 28, complained of severe pain and bleeding after returning home from school on April 30.

The child allegedly told her mother that a “bada sa ladka” had taken her downstairs and assaulted her.

During the investigation, the victim allegedly stated that a “madam” had taken her to the basement, removed her clothes, cleaned the blood stains and gave her sweets before later identifying the accused teacher during video-recorded identification proceedings.