Recently, while granting bail to a father accused of raping his daughter, the Delhi High Court observed that the daughter's statement lacked credibility. The court emphasized the importance of thoroughly examining the testimonies of child victims, acknowledging their susceptibility to external influences, particularly in cases where there are ongoing parental disputes.

The bench of Justice Amit Mahajan held, “The delay between the alleged incident and the filing of the complaint, and the fact that the mother of the victim and the applicant who also happens to father of the victim, are litigating against each other due to matrimonial acrimony cannot be ignored by the Court while deciding the application for bail”. 

The order was issued in response to an application seeking pre-arrest bail in a case filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). The applicant sought bail following an FIR lodged by his daughter, accusing him of attempting to rape her.

The allegation stated that the victim felt someone touching her inside her clothes while she was asleep but was unable to raise an alarm. She claimed that around 4:00 am, her mother entered the room, turned on the lights, started shouting, and told the victim to wear clothes since she was naked.

Advocates Jaideep Malik and Siddharth Soni, representing the applicant, argued that there was an ongoing matrimonial dispute between the applicant and the victim’s mother, with multiple litigations pending. They also contended that the applicant’s wife had influenced their daughter to file the FIR after a delay of 24 days, and the victim had already made two statements indicating that the applicant had done nothing wrong.

Conversely, Additional Public Prosecutor Pradeep Gahalot, representing the State, asserted that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, consistently stated that the applicant had sexually assaulted her and touched her private parts on the alleged date. He further argued that the applicant, being the victim’s father, had threatened her, preventing her from initially making a statement, and that she only filed the complaint after receiving support from her family members.

The court noted, “The applicant and the mother of the victim have a long history of matrimonial discord”. The court reiterated that, even when considering a bail application after charges have been framed, Section 29 raises the threshold of satisfaction required for granting bail. Therefore, the court needed to assess whether the evidence presented was credible or prima facie supported the prosecution's case.

The court noted that on the alleged date of the offense, the victim's uncle contacted the police, and the complainant provided a written statement affirming that the applicant had not committed any wrongdoing towards her. During the medical examination, no accusations were made against the applicant, and the victim reiterated to the police that the applicant had not sexually assaulted her. However, the victim later changed her stance and accused the applicant for the first time.

The bench emphasized that when considering bail applications under the POCSO Act, several factors must be taken into account, including the age of the minor victim compared to the accused, any familial relationship between them, the accused's history of offenses, and the likelihood of the accused threatening the victim if granted bail.

“In cases where the victim is a child, her statement has to be scrutinized with great care and caution as children can be easily swayed away and are prone to tutoring. It can also be a possibility that the statement is made at the behest of one of the parents”, the court further emphasized. 

The court emphasized the necessity of carefully examining the statements of child victims, acknowledging their susceptibility to influence and the potential for such statements to be made under parental pressure. This consideration is particularly pertinent given the societal repercussions and stigma associated with such accusations, especially in light of the ongoing conflict between the victim's parents, who have lodged multiple complaints against each other.