Dindoshi Sessions Court denied anticipatory bail to grandfather in child assault case
A Dindoshi sessions court on May 15 rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a 77-year-old Bengaluru resident accused of sexually assaulting his three-year-old granddaughter.
The court said the accused could flee or tamper with evidence and put the welfare of the child victim above all other considerations.
The court was hearing a plea filed by a man who was handed over to the Powai police station in April 2026 on a complaint by his daughter-in-law. The woman stated that she and her husband had separated.
According to the complaint, the woman’s husband allegedly took the child to stay with him twice. After these visits, the mother allegedly noticed injuries on the child’s lips and patches on the legs. In March, when the daughter returned from the father, the mother allegedly saw the girl repeatedly touching her private parts. When questioned, the child said that her grandfather had allegedly sexually assaulted her.
The grandfather’s lawyer Marmik Shah said the man was implicated in the case. Shah said the informant and the complainant’s son were living separately due to problems.
Divorce proceedings are ongoing between them. Shah pointed out the delay in filing the FIR and in conducting the child’s medical examination. He said the request was made with a motive and that videos and pictures of the child allegedly showed her having fun with her family.
Petitioner’s lawyers Shubham More, Sagar Shetty and Ashish Venugopal – opposed the plea. According to them, the audio recording of the conversation between the child and the mother exists and serves as evidence against the accused. They said the child had allegedly been traumatized and that releasing the man on bail would allow him to abuse the court process.
The court examined a medical report which concluded that the child had been sexually assaulted, although no signs of injury were visible. The court stated that the man was almost 80 years old and that he was the child’s grandfather.
However, he said: “Having regard to the objective of protecting the child victim and having regard to her interest and welfare and also having regard to her age, the contents of the FIR and the medical report cannot be ignored at this juncture and the complainant’s defense be believed.”
Published – 19 May 2026 06:03 IST