Regular Bail in Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) : Section 15 : Punishment for accessing pornographic material involving children – in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Analyzing the Regular Bail Provision under POCSO Act

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was established with the overarching intent to rigorously punish sexual crimes against minors. Within the framework of the legislation is a provision for regular bail which is a necessary legal recourse for those accused under the Act. However, the provision for bail under POCSO is approached with a certain degree of caution and stringency, reflecting the sensitive nature of crimes involved.

In analyzing the bail provisions under the Act, it is significant to acknowledge that the legislature has imposed strict conditions that need to be satisfied before the grant of bail. This underlines the intent to ensure that the release of the accused does not impede the investigation process or create a hostile environment for the young victim.

Furthermore, the Act stipulates that for offenses that are heinous and attract severe penalties, such as aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the courts are to critically assess the possibility of granting bail. Only if the court, after proper scrutiny, is convinced that the accused is not likely to commit any offense while on bail, or tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses, can they consider granting bail.

  • Factors considered for bail may include:
    • The nature and gravity of the accusation.
    • Risk of the accused absconding or influencing witnesses.
    • The likelihood of repeat offenses if the accused is released on bail.
    • The age and health of the accused.
    • Evidence and circumstances that can establish whether there might be a false implication of the accused.
    • The potential of delay in trial and the period of custody already undergone by the accused.
  • Another point of consideration is the possibility of granting anticipatory bail. Under the POCSO Act, anticipatory bail is generally not favored due to the gravity of offenses. The courts meticulously evaluate the repercussions before granting anticipatory bail to ensure the safety of the child and the larger interest of justice.
  • It is also pertinent to note that the right of the accused to seek bail does not outrun the rights and the safety of the child involved. Hence, while the provision of bail exists, its application is tightly regulated.

In essence, the bail provision under the POCSO Act embodies a balanced approach, where the rights of the accused are weighed against the imperative to safeguard children from potential harm. This approach helps in maintaining the delicate balance between the rights of the accused and the victim, upholding the principles of natural justice while prioritizing child protection.

Section 15: Penal Consequences for Accessing Child Pornography

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, as part of its comprehensive mandate to protect children from sexual crimes, includes strict penalties for accessing child pornography. Recognizing the role of child pornography in perpetuating the sexual exploitation of children, Section 15 of the Act criminally penalizes the storage of any material that sexually exploits a child or children.

Being convicted under Section 15 of the POCSO Act can lead to severe penal consequences, which include:

  • A term of imprisonment that may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both, if a person stores or possesses pornography involving a child for personal use.
  • A term of imprisonment that may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine, if a person stores or possesses such material with the intent to share or transmit it.
  • Situations where such material is stored inadvertently or without knowledge, provided that the individual reports it within the stipulated time, may be considered for exemption under the Act.
  • Additionally, the Act extends to cover not just digital but also physical forms of child pornographic content.

These strict legal repercussions serve as a deterrent to prevent the circulation of child pornography resulting from its negative impact on society and the relentless harm it inflicts upon its young victims. The penal provisions also reinforce the need for active intervention by individuals, internet service providers, and digital platforms to ensure that such material is neither created, transmitted, nor stored.

Moreover, the escalating concern regarding internet connectivity laying the groundwork for easier access to illegal child pornography emphasizes the significance of robust law enforcement and rapid judicial action when violations of Section 15 are reported. The law, in this context, also aims to catalyze awareness amongst individuals and organizations about the gravity and illegality of accessing, storing, and circulating such exploitative material.

Enforcing Section 15 and its penal consequences is a critical step in curbing child pornography and shielding children from the exploitation it entails, thus aligning with the overarching objectives of the POCSO Act to fortify child protection mechanisms.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s Interpretation of Bail in POCSO Cases

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has had the occasion to interpret the bail provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in several cases, shaping a nuanced understanding that resonates with both legal principles and the protective spirit of the Act. The High Court’s stance emphasizes the need for judicious application of the provisions, taking into account the rights of the accused while not overlooking the best interests of the child.

Due attention has been given by the High Court to the nature of the allegations, the severity of the harm caused to the child, and the impact on the social fabric. Intense scrutiny is employed by the judges to ensure that their decisions on granting bail do not undermine the objectives of the Act or jeopardize the child’s safety and wellbeing. The court’s deliberations extend to meticulously considering the credibility of the accusations, the evidence presented, and the conduct of the accused before and after the arrest.

  • The High Court is known to assess whether the accused has a criminal history and if they pose a flight risk.
  • The court considers if there is a substantial likelihood of the accused tampering with the evidence or influencing witnesses.
  • The court examines the necessity to keep the accused in custody for ensuring a fair trial and maintaining public order and decorum.
  • The jail term already served by the accused relative to the potential sentence if convicted is pondered upon.

In several instances, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has underscored that the gravity of the offense under the POCSO Act necessitates a departure from the liberal approach generally adopted in bail matters. Furthermore, they have repeatedly highlighted that this stringent outlook is reflective of a compelling state interest in protecting children.

The Court has also been mindful of the possibility of misuse of stringent laws and the underlying principle of ‘presumption of innocence until proven guilty,’ ensuring that the rights of the accused to a fair trial, including the right to seek bail, are preserved. Nonetheless, these rights are carefully balanced against the potential risks and the possibility of re-victimization of the child.

Decisions by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in POCSO cases have shaped legal discourse and are often cited for their nuanced interpretation of bail provisions, safeguarding the principles of justice. For these high-stakes cases, the High Court remains a vigilant overseer, attempting to mitigate any harm that could impinge on the welfare of the child or the community at large.


List of Most Recommended Lawyers:


1. Advocate Priya Desai
  • Experience: more than 20 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

2. Advocate Pooja Choudhary
  • Experience: more than 25 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

3. Advocate Aanya Jain
  • Experience: more than 35 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

4. Advocate Suhana Joshi
  • Experience: more than 40 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

5. Advocate Aarushi Jain
  • Experience: more than 30 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

6. Advocate Myra Patel
  • Experience: more than 50 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

7. Advocate Vedant Singh
  • Experience: more than 30 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

8. Advocate Ananya Bhatia
  • Experience: more than 25 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

9. Advocate Aarav Mathur
  • Experience: more than 20 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

10. Advocate Advik Banerjee
  • Experience: more than 45 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer