Court: Delhi High Court

Case Name: Surjeet Kumar @ Kalu v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Case No.: Bail Application No. 552/2026
Decision Date: 6 February 2026

Context

The Delhi High Court, while dismissing a bail application in a case arising under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), took note of repeated adjournments and long gaps in the recording of witness testimony at the trial stage. The Court expressed concern that prolonged intervals between examination dates in sensitive cases involving child victims and witnesses create a real risk of witness intimidation, pressure, influence and dilution of testimony.

The issue was examined in the context of the statutory mandate of expeditious trial under the POCSO framework and the broader obligation of criminal courts to ensure fair, effective and timely administration of justice.

Court’s Analysis

The High Court reiterated that POCSO cases involve vulnerable victims and witnesses, and that the criminal justice system must adopt procedures that minimise the scope for external interference and secondary victimisation.

The Court observed that once the examination of a witness has commenced, prolonged adjournments in between dates of recording evidence undermine the integrity of the trial process. Such delays create opportunities for pressure, inducement or intimidation of witnesses, and may also impact the spontaneity, consistency and credibility of testimony.

The Court underscored that the mandate of the POCSO Act is not limited to protection at the stage of investigation alone, but extends throughout the trial process. The requirement of conducting trials in a child-friendly and time-bound manner is central to ensuring both substantive justice for the victim and procedural fairness to the accused.

The Court further emphasised that trial courts have a proactive duty to manage their dockets and schedules in a manner that prevents avoidable fragmentation of evidence recording in sensitive cases.

It was also noted that delays in recording testimony contribute to prolonged trauma for child witnesses, who may be compelled to repeatedly revisit the incident over extended periods. Such procedural delays, apart from affecting the quality of evidence, are inconsistent with the objective of ensuring a supportive and non-hostile environment for child victims under the POCSO framework.

Order of the Court

In view of the above, the Delhi High Court directed that in trials under the POCSO Act, once the examination of a witness commences, the recording of testimony should, as far as practicable, be carried out on a day-to-day basis until completion. The Court emphasised that unnecessary adjournments during the stage of evidence must be avoided, particularly where the witness is a child or where the testimony relates to the core facts of the offence.

The Court directed that a copy of the order be circulated to all Principal District & Sessions Judges in Delhi for onward communication to trial courts handling POCSO matters, to ensure uniform compliance.

The Court clarified that while judicial discretion in scheduling remains with the trial court, such discretion must be exercised in a manner that advances the objectives of the POCSO Act, protects vulnerable witnesses, and upholds the fairness and integrity of the criminal justice process.

Written by Adv. Aiswarya Krishnan