"High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh ruled that the conduct of the victim, specifically avoiding testifying in court, was considered by the court as a reason to grant bail to the accused in a case involving offenses of kidnapping and sexual assault under the POCSO Act."

The court emphasized that the accused's statutory right to bail cannot be indefinitely postponed due to the victim's unwillingness to testify. The order stated that the victim's conduct of avoiding the witness box is sufficient grounds to grant bail to the accused.

The accused in this case had initially been arrested in April 2020 on charges of kidnapping and sexual assault. His first bail application was rejected by the trial court because the victim's statement had not been recorded. The High Court disposed of the victim's bail application and allowed the accused to approach the trial court again.

However, when the victim approached the trial court again, the plea was dismissed once more, citing the pending statement recording. The High Court reviewed the case and noted that the accused could not be detained for a period longer than half the maximum punishment specified for the offenses.

Considering the submission that the investigating agency was unable to locate the victim, the court deemed this insufficient grounds to deny the accused's statutory right to bail. Consequently, Justice Sanjay Dhar granted bail to the accused upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety of the same amount.

The accused was represented by Advocate Vasudha Sharma, while Deputy Advocate General Vishal Bharti represented the respondents.