Friendship Does Not Give Any License To Rape: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To POCSO Accused

The Delhi High Court, while refusing to grant anticipatory bail to the accused observed that friendship does not give any license to rape the victim repeatedly, confine her, and beat her mercilessly.

The case was registered under offences punishable under Sections 64(2),115(2),127(2),351 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

A single-bench Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stated that, “The contention on behalf of the applicant that the applicant and the complainant were friends and therefore, it could be a case of consensual relationship, cannot be accepted by this Court, since even if the parties concerned were friends, friendship does not give any license to the applicant to rape the victim repeatedly, confine her in his friend’s house and beat her mercilessly, as prima facie disclosed by the complainant in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, duly corroborated by the medical records.”

Further Court also added, “ Quite naturally, it was owing to the fear and trauma of the said incident that the complainant had initially resisted from disclosing about the incident to her parents.”

Advocate Hitesh Thakur appeared for the Petitioner, and Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar for the state.

Brief Facts

The FIR in this case was registered on the complaint of a minor victim aged about 17 years, alleging that she had known the accused for the past 3–4 years as he lived in her neighbourhood. On 26 June 2025, when no one was at her home, she had gone to meet him near Hamdard, from where he had taken her to his friend’s house, where the accused had beaten her and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her several times. Out of fear, she had not revealed the details of sexual assault and had refused medical examination. The victim has alleged that the accused had threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident to anyone. On 5th July,2025, after an altercation between the mother of the accused and the prosecutrix, she had finally disclosed the incident to her mother, following which they had approached the police, which led to the registration of this FIR.

Court Reasoning

The Court opined that, “This Court is conscious of the fact that the applicant has still not joined the investigation, despite his anticipatory bail application having been either withdrawn or rejected on four occasions in the past…in view of the foregoing circumstances, coupled with the serious nature of allegations levelled in the present case, prima facie corroborated by the material on record, this Court finds that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.”

Cause Title: Sumit Singh v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr.(Bail Appln. 4008/2025)

Appearance

Petitioner Advocate Hitesh Thakur and Advocate Shubham Tyagi.

Respondent Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar.

Click here to read/download the Order