By Pradyumna Satish 

On 15.07.2024, the victim, ‘S,’ was taken to the house of the accused by his daughter, Sakina. While at the house, the accused called the victim to the terrace under the pretext of needing help. When she arrived, he asked her to remove her clothes. Upon her refusal, he forcibly removed her pajami and touched her inappropriately on her chest. The victim managed to push him away and ran home but did not initially disclose the incident to anyone out of fear or shock. Later, she confided in her school teacher about the incident. The teacher, upon learning of the allegations, informed the school administration, which then called the victim’s mother to the school and relayed the details of the complaint.  

Following this, legal action was initiated. On 24.07.2024, the victim’s statement was officially recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, where she reiterated her initial complaint and provided further details. She alleged that on the date of the incident, the accused had also removed his own pants, attempted to insert his fingers into her vagina, and tried penile penetration upon her. The accused was arrested on 23.07.2024 in connection with the case. The investigation proceeded based on the victim’s allegations, her statement, and the circumstances surrounding the incident. 

The court found the victim’s testimony credible, as her statements remained consistent and provided a clear sequence of events. The alleged contradictions regarding the presence of other family members did not discredit her testimony, as she had explained that the accused had ensured his wife and daughter were not at home. The court also noted that the delay in filing the FIR was justified, given the victim’s young age and the psychological trauma she endured. It recognized that children in such situations often hesitate to inform their parents and may find it easier to disclose the incident to teachers or school authorities first. 

The severity of the offense and the breach of trust were significant factors in the court’s reasoning. The accused was a trusted neighbor, whom the victim addressed as “chacha,” making the betrayal even more profound. The court underscored that sexual offenses against minors are not just physical violations but also result in severe psychological and emotional trauma, necessitating a strong legal response. Given that the accused resided in the same vicinity as the victim, the court acknowledged the risk of potential interference with witnesses or intimidation, especially since key prosecution witnesses were yet to be examined. 

Emphasizing its duty to protect child victims and ensure justice, the court also commended the responsible actions of the school authorities in promptly reporting the incident. It stressed the importance of institutional support in such cases and the need for a decisive judicial response to deter such offenses. 

The court, after considering the seriousness of the allegations, the young age of the victim, and the potential impact of the crime, found no merit in the accused’s request for bail. The court emphasized that sexual offenses against minors, particularly by individuals in positions of trust, cause severe psychological trauma and must be met with a firm legal response. Given the pending examination of key witnesses and the risk of tampering with evidence, the court determined that granting bail at this stage was not justified. 

Case Title: Subhan Ali v. The State NCT of Delhi and anr 

Citation: Bail Appln. 4422/2024 

Click here to read/download the judgement.