No Injuries Does Not Mean No Sexual Assault in Child Sexual Assault Case (POCSO)

Introduction

Can the absence of visible physical injuries justify granting bail to a person accused of sexually assaulting a three-year-old child? Can a young child's inability to describe an alleged incident in a perfectly chronological and detailed manner be treated as a reason to doubt the child's account at the bail stage?

The Delhi High Court examined these questions in State v. Lalit Kumar, CRL.M.C. No. 3956/2026, decided on 29 June 2026.

1. Background: Alleged Sexual Assault of a Three-Year-Old Child

According to the prosecution, the child had attended the junior school in Janakpuri for only the second time on 30 April 2026.

After returning home, the child reportedly complained of pain in her private parts and told her mother that a person at school had taken her downstairs and inserted a finger into her private parts, causing pain and bleeding.

The child's mother contacted the police, and FIR No. 104/2026 was registered at Janakpuri Police Station on 1 May 2026 under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

During the investigation, the child identified the school caretaker, Lalit Kumar, as the person who had allegedly taken her to the basement and sexually assaulted her. She also identified the place where the alleged incident had occurred.

On 7 May 2026, the Additional Sessions Judge (Special POCSO Court), Dwarka Courts, granted regular bail to the accused. The State and the child's mother challenged that order before the Delhi High Court.

2. What Did the Delhi High Court Hold?

A. Absence of External Injuries Does Not Automatically Disprove Sexual Assault

The High Court found that the trial court had placed undue emphasis on the absence of external injuries recorded during the child's medical examination.

The Court reiterated that the absence of visible injuries cannot, by itself, negate an allegation of sexual assault. The nature of an alleged sexual act, the circumstances in which it occurred and the time at which a medical examination was conducted may all affect whether physical injuries are present.

Some forms of sexual assault may leave no visible external injuries. Therefore, a medical examination that records no external injury cannot automatically be treated as conclusive proof that no assault occurred.

B. A Three-Year-Old Child Cannot Be Expected to Narrate Events Like an Adult

The Court emphasised that the victim was barely three years old.

A child of such tender age cannot reasonably be expected to provide a perfectly chronological account, accurately recall every detail or describe an event using the precision expected of an adult witness.

The Court observed that a young child's account may sometimes appear incoherent or lack logical sequence. That, by itself, does not establish that the account is incorrect.

The trial court had acknowledged the child's age but, according to the High Court, had not given sufficient weight to the child's identification of the accused and the place of occurrence.

C. The Bail Court Should Not Conduct a Mini-Trial

The High Court found that the trial court had placed excessive emphasis on selected aspects of the evidence while deciding bail.

At the bail stage, the court must consider the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during the investigation, the circumstances of the accused and other relevant factors. It is not ordinarily the stage to conduct a detailed evaluation of the evidence as though the trial had concluded.

The High Court considered that the trial court had not adequately assessed the child's identification of the accused and the alleged place of occurrence in the context of the overall material.

D. The Investigation Was Still at a Crucial Stage

The High Court also considered the status of the investigation when bail was granted.

Important forensic reports were still awaited, including reports relating to exhibits seized from the alleged place of occurrence and the examination of the school's CCTV system and digital video recorder (DVR).

The investigation had found that numerous CCTV cameras were not functioning at the relevant time. The available footage and the condition of the recording system required further examination.

The State also raised concerns about the possibility of the accused influencing school staff who were material witnesses, given his long association with the institution.

The High Court considered these factors relevant to assessing whether the accused should have been released at such an early stage.

4. Why Is the Age of the Child Important in POCSO Cases?

The POCSO Act was enacted to protect children from sexual offences and to provide procedures suited to their vulnerability.

A very young child may not have the vocabulary to describe an incident in adult terms. The child may communicate through simple expressions, gestures or an imperfect sequence of events. The child's account must therefore be understood in light of the child's age and capacity.

This does not mean that a child's statement must automatically be accepted as conclusive proof. The investigation and trial must still assess the evidence in accordance with law.

Section 6 of the POCSO Act

Section 6 prescribes punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 5 of the POCSO Act.

The prosecution in this case invoked Section 6 because of the nature of the alleged offence and the circumstances in which it was said to have occurred.

The invocation of a penal provision in an FIR or charge is not a finding of guilt. The prosecution must establish the offence in accordance with the law and the evidence produced during trial.

Section 528 of the BNSS

Section 528 of the BNSS preserves the High Court's inherent powers to make orders necessary to give effect to orders under the Sanhita, prevent abuse of the process of any court and secure the ends of justice.

The Delhi High Court exercised its jurisdiction to examine the legality of the trial court's bail order. It found that the relevant circumstances had not been adequately considered and set the order aside.

The decision illustrates that bail orders remain subject to judicial scrutiny where the court below has overlooked material factors or reached a conclusion that cannot be sustained on the relevant record.

6. Final Outcome: Bail Cancelled

The Delhi High Court allowed the State's challenge and set aside the order dated 7 May 2026 granting regular bail to Lalit Kumar.

The Court directed the accused to surrender before the jurisdictional POCSO court on 1 July 2026.

The decision did not determine whether the accused was guilty of the alleged offence. The prosecution remained to be adjudicated through the criminal process.

The order was concerned with the legality of the bail decision, particularly the treatment of the child's account, the medical findings and the incomplete state of the investigation.

7. Why This Judgment Matters

Medical findings must be assessed in context

The absence of external injuries does not automatically establish that sexual assault did not occur. Medical evidence must be considered alongside the child's account and other available evidence.

Children's statements require age-sensitive assessment

A young child cannot be expected to narrate events with adult-like precision. Minor inconsistencies or an imperfect chronology must be assessed in light of the child's age and capacity.

Bail decisions must consider the complete material

A court should not selectively rely on the absence of injuries or one part of the CCTV record while overlooking other relevant circumstances, including identification and the stage of the investigation.

Bail is not a final determination of guilt

Cancelling bail does not establish guilt, just as granting bail does not establish innocence. The purpose of the bail hearing is to decide whether release is justified under the applicable legal principles, while the trial determines guilt based on the evidence.

Need legal assistance with a POCSO matter or a challenge to a bail order? NyayNiti can assist with legal research, assessment of case records and representation in appropriate criminal proceedings, depending on the facts and applicable law.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The legal position and available remedies depend on the facts, evidence and procedural history of each case.