[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ankit Lakra vs State Nct Of Delhi on 6 February, 2026
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 06.02.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025
ANKIT LAKRA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sachin Pahwa and Mrs. Param
Kaur Pahwa, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for
State with SI Ankita and SI Chanchal.
Mr. Archit Upadhayay, Advocate for
victim with victim and mother of
victim in person.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 370/2023 of
Police Station Pul Prahlad Pur for offence under Section 376 IPC and
Section 6 of POCSO Act.
2. In furtherance of last order, DHCLSC appointed a legal aid counsel to
represent the prosecutrix. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant
and learned APP for State as well as learned DHCLSC counsel for the
prosecutrix.
BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025 Page 1 of 5 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8
Digitally Signed 01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.06 17:46:53 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.02.2026
17:52:26
3. Broadly speaking, FIR against the accused/applicant was registered
on the statement of the prosecutrix in which, she disclosed her age as 17
years and stated that she knew her neighbour Ankit (the accused/applicant),
with whom she developed friendship, and they established physical relations
at their homes repeatedly, but she did not disclose about the same to anyone;
that later in the month of April 2023, she went to the home of the
accused/applicant and there also, she voluntarily had sexual relations with
the accused/applicant and she got pregnant. It is only in November 2023,
when she developed stomach ache, that her mother took her to the hospital
where she gave birth to a child. After stating those facts in the FIR, the
prosecutrix also stated in the FIR that the accused/applicant had falsely
promised to get married with her to make physical relations.
4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the prosecutrix
was aged above 17 years and was fully aware of the consensual relations in
which she was engaged with the accused/applicant. The accused/applicant is
stated to be in custody since 07.11.2023 and all public witnesses already
stand examined during trial. Further, it is contended by learned counsel that
accused/applicant still wants to get married with prosecutrix.
5. Learned APP for State opposes the bail application on the ground that
ultimately the fact remains that the prosecutrix was aged below 18 years at
the time of the alleged sexual encounters.
6. Learned DHCLSC counsel for prosecutrix also contends that this is
BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025 Page 2 of 5 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4
5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155
70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26
fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.06 17:46:43 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.02.2026
17:52:26
not a fit case to grant bail to the accused/applicant.
7. In view of submission advanced on behalf of accused/applicant on last
date that the accused/applicant wants to get married with the prosecutrix but
it is her mother who is objecting, I also spoke in Hindi with the prosecutrix
present in court along with her mother. The prosecutrix appears to be well
informed and mentally matured. The prosecutrix submits that the child born
to her has been given by her to her paternal aunt and now, she does not want
to get married with the accused/applicant. Further, the prosecutrix also
submits that once she gets settled in her career, she would herself consent
for releasing the accused/applicant on bail.
8. In the above backdrop, it would be important to keep in mind that the
prosecutrix at the time of the alleged sexual encounters with the
accused/applicant was above 17 years of age and was matured enough to
know what was good for her. It is also important to keep in mind that even
according to the FIR, which was registered on the statement of the
prosecutrix, the sexual relations between her and the accused/applicant were
with her full consent. Of course, technically speaking, age of the prosecutrix
being below 18 years, her consent would not be valid. But here is a case of
the girl nearing the age of majority, fully conscious of the consequences of
her acts, driven by her humanly desires on one hand and liberty of the
accused/applicant on the other.
9. As regards the false promise of getting married, even in her testimony
BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025 Page 3 of 5 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
Digitally Signed 5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff80
1e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.06 17:46:32 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.02.2026
17:52:26
as PW2, the prosecutrix stated that the promise of marriage came up from
the side of accused/applicant only when she informed him about her
pregnancy.
10. One also wonders as to how is it that till the prosecutrix developed
labour pains, her mother did not come to know about her pregnancy and
remained silent.
11. As mentioned above, all public witnesses stand already examined, so
there is no scope of any effort of the accused/applicant to tamper with
evidence.
12. Learned APP and learned counsel for prosecutrix also submit that the
accused/applicant be directed not to leave Delhi-NCR without permission of
the learned trial court, for which learned counsel for accused/applicant
expresses fair consent.
13. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to
deprive further liberty to the accused/applicant.
14. Therefore, the bail application is allowed and accused/applicant is
directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the Trial Court. It is also directed that the accused/applicant shall not
leave Delhi-NCR without seeking permission from the trial court during
BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025 Page 4 of 5 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
Digitally Signed 570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e
26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.06 17:46:22 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.02.2026
17:52:26
pendency of the trial.
15. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.
16. Of course, nothing observed in this order shall be read to the prejudice
of either side at the final stage of the trial.
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4a
fec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626ca
cca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5
d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c48796
5ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.06 17:45:54 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 06, 2026/ry
BAIL APPLN. 4565/2025 Page 5 of 5 pages
