Andhra Pradesh HC Grants Bail to Youth in POCSO and BNS Case Citing Custody Period

Prioritizing the principle of liberty for a youth at an impressionable age, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has granted bail to a 20-year-old accused of kidnapping a minor, noting that the substantial part of the investigation stood completed during his 27-day judicial custody. The ruling underscores the court's balancing act between the gravity of allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the procedural status of the criminal investigation.

A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao adjudicated the criminal petition filed by the accused seeking enlargement on bail. The petitioner faced charges under the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 following allegations of eloping with a 15-year-old girl.

Key Takeaways

Custody Duration vs. Investigation Progress

Bail was considered appropriate as the petitioner had spent nearly a month in custody, during which time the primary investigation and witness examinations were largely concluded.

Age of the Accused

The Court took judicial notice of the petitioner’s 'impressionable age' (20 years) while evaluating the necessity of continued incarceration.

Stringent Procedural Safeguards

The grant of bail is not unconditional; it is tethered to strict reporting requirements and restrictions on movement to ensure the accused remains within the legal process.

Judicial Scrutiny of Allegations and Investigation

The prosecution opposed the bail plea, contending that the investigation was still underway and material witnesses remained to be examined. The State expressed concerns regarding the potential of the petitioner to abscond and evade the process of law. However, the Court observed that seven witnesses had already been examined and the remaining part of the investigation, except for the filing of the Charge Sheet, was complete.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "The Petitioner is at impressionable age of 20 years, while the victim girl is aged 15 years. It is alleged that the Petitioner, under the guise of love, took away the victim girl from the custody of her parents. The Petitioner was apprehended on 10.09.2026 and has been in judicial custody for the past 27 days. So far, seven witnesses have been examined. Except for filing of the Charge Sheet, the remaining part of the investigation has been completed."

The Court has the following directions:

"i. The Petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nuzvid.

ii. The Petitioner/Accused shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the Charge Sheet.

iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.

iv. The Petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.

v. The Petitioner/Accused shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required.

vi. The Petitioner/Accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.

vii. The Petitioner/Accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer."

Ratio

Enlargement on bail is permissible when a significant portion of the investigation is complete, a substantial period of custody has been served, and the accused is of an impressionable age, provided that stringent conditions are imposed to prevent the tampering of evidence or absconding.

Background

The case originated from a complaint lodged at the Nuzvid Rural Police Station, Krishna District, leading to Crime No. 164 of 2026. The petitioner was accused of taking a 15-year-old girl away from parental custody under the pretext of love. He was subsequently charged under Sections 78(2) and 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 12 read with Section 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The petitioner approached the High Court under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, asserting his innocence and claiming false implication. During the proceedings, as the victim was not represented, the Court appointed a legal aid counsel to ensure her interests were protected. After considering the progress of the investigation and the nature of the allegations, the Court allowed the petition, directing the petitioner's release on bail subject to the aforementioned conditions.

Case Details:
Case No.: CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8456/2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:APHC:42545
Case Title: D BHAVANI SIVA vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANOTHER
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): AKULA VAMSI KRISHNA, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): GARUGU N V DURGA SAI EKAMBARAM, Legal Aid Counsel; PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Source: 2026 CaseBase(AP) 17811