Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Granted To Teacher Accused In Janakpuri School Rape Case
The Delhi High Court has set aside the bail granted to a teacher accused in the Janakpuri school rape case involving the alleged sexual assault of a three-year-old nursery student.Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed that a child of such tender age cannot be expected to disclose every detail of the incident at the first instance and that the victim's subsequent statements and identification of...
The Delhi High Court has set aside the bail granted to a teacher accused in the Janakpuri school rape case involving the alleged sexual assault of a three-year-old nursery student.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed that a child of such tender age cannot be expected to disclose every detail of the incident at the first instance and that the victim's subsequent statements and identification of the accused could not be ignored merely because the teacher was not named in the initial complaint.
The Court thus allowed a plea filed by the Delhi Government challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge granting regular bail to the teacher, who is facing charges under Sections 64(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 6, 17 and 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
She has been directed to surrender before the trial court within three days.
According to the prosecution, the three-year-old victim, who had joined a junior school in the city's Janakpuri area only two days earlier, complained to her mother after returning home on April 30 that a big boy at school had inserted his finger into her private part, causing pain and bleeding.
During the investigation, the victim stated under Section 183 BNSS that her class teacher had taken her to the basement, removed her clothes, cleaned the blood stains and offered her sweets. The child subsequently identified the teacher during video-recorded identification proceedings conducted by the police.
State argued that the trial court had virtually conducted a mini-trial while considering the bail plea by questioning the child's version and entertaining allegations of tutoring despite there being no material on record to support such claims. It was also submitted that the teacher's long-standing association with the school, placed her in a position to influence witnesses.
Opposing the petition, the teacher contended that she had been working at the school for thirteen years without any criminal antecedents, that her name did not figure in the FIR and that she had cooperated with the investigation.
Allowing the State's plea, the High Court observed that the trial court had itself acknowledged that a three-year-old child could not be expected to narrate the entire incident with precision.
“...Trial Court was well aware of the factual position on hand, and that any three-year-old girl child like the victim herein cannot be expected to reveal all/ each and every detail at the time of making the initial complaint,” the Court observed.
It reiterated that an FIR is not an encyclopedia of the prosecution case and that details emerging subsequently during the investigation cannot be discarded on that ground alone.
Noting that bail had been granted only six days after the teacher's arrest, the High Court set it aside.
Notably, the High Court had last month also cancelled the bail granted to the school's caretaker, the principal accused in the case, holding that the trial court had failed to adequately consider the child's consistent version of events and the gravity of the allegations.
Appearance: Mr. S.V. Raju, ASG with Mr. Aman Usman, APP for the State; Mr. K.K. Manan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. M.S. Bammi, Ms. Uditi Bali, Mr. Ms. Nida Akhtar, Mr. Manish Kumar and Mr. K. S. Choudhary, Advs. ACP Vijay Singh, with Insp. Babita, DIU/ West Distt.
Case title: State v. K
Case no.: CRL.M.C. 4328/2026