The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar recently granted bail to Manzoor Ahmad Khuroo, the accused in a case involving serious charges under the POCSO Act and other penal provisions. The decision, pronounced on August 1, 2025, came after the court examined the evidence, including the statements of key witnesses who turned hostile, and a dispute over the prosecutrix's age. Court’s Court's
Background of the Case
The case originated from FIR No.223/2024 registered at Police Station Anantnag. The prosecutrix's father alleged that his daughter, a 10th-grade student, was sexually assaulted by an unknown person, resulting in pregnancy. The accused, Manzoor Ahmad Khuroo, was later identified as the perpetrator. The charges included Sections 137(2), 64, and 89 of the BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) and Sections 5(ii) and 6 of the POCSO Act.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Quashes FIR in Sexual Harassment Case After Amicable Settlement
During the investigation, the prosecutrix disclosed that Khuroo, who ran a hotel near the DC Office in Anantnag, forcibly took her to his home and sexually assaulted her. However, during the trial, she retracted her statement, claiming she was shielding the accused due to their family friendship. Her parents also failed to support the prosecution's case, casting doubt on the allegations.
The court outlined the following principles while considering the bail application:
Nature and Gravity of the Accusation: The seriousness of the charges, particularly under the POCSO Act, was a key factor.
Witness Credibility: The court noted the hostile stance of the prosecutrix and her parents, which weakened the prosecution's case.
Risk of Tampering: Since most material witnesses had already testified, the court found no risk of evidence tampering.
Age Dispute: The defense raised doubts about the prosecutrix's age, citing her statement and her parents' testimony, which contradicted the prosecution's claim that she was a minor.
Read also:- SC Closes Wife's Transfer Plea After Mutual Divorce Settlement Between Parties
The court referred to Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, which create presumptions of guilt and culpable mental state against the accused. However, the court emphasized that these presumptions are rebuttable. In this case, the hostile witnesses and the age dispute provided sufficient grounds to rebut the presumptions, tilting the balance in favor of granting bail.
Justice Sanjay Dhar noted that the prosecutrix and her parents had not supported the prosecution's case during the trial. Additionally, the defense successfully cast doubt on the prosecutrix's age, which was crucial for invoking the POCSO Act. The court also considered that most witnesses had already been examined, reducing the risk of tampering.
"Without commenting on the merits of the case, the court found prima facie substance in the petitioner's arguments. The presumption of culpability under the POCSO Act was rebutted, and there was no evidence to suggest the accused would repeat the offense or flee justice."
Read also:- SC Orders TSRTC to Reinstate Colour-Blind Driver, Calls Retirement Unlawful
The court granted bail to Khuroo under the following conditions:
- He must furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with one surety of the same amount.
- He must attend all court hearings without fail.
- He cannot leave the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir without the trial court's permission.
- He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses.
Case Title: Manzoor Ahmad Khuroo vs. UT of J&K and Another
Case No.: Bail App No. 84/2025