![\"No](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-47529300,imgsize-110164,width-400,height-225,resizemode-75\/47529300.jpg\")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\nNew Delhi:<\/span> Delhi High Court<\/a> Monday, while cancelling the bail of a 57-year-old private school caretaker accused of raping the minor in a Janakpuri school, said it won\u2019t be correct to doubt the version of a three-year-old child who is the victim at this stage.\u201cThe impugned order has missed the crux of the issue, as to why a minor child of three years of age would make such a complaint and would not only identify the respondent as the offender but also point out the place of occurrence,\u201d Justice Vinod Kumar observed, allowing the plea by Delhi Police<\/a> and the child\u2019s mother against the trial court\u2019s May 7 decision to release Lalit Kumar<\/a> on bail.It asked Kumar to surrender on July 1 and said it \u201cappears that due consideration was not given to the fact that the victim made a complaint on the date of incident itself, on 30.04.2026, about the pain in her private part\u201d after it was touched by a person.While the victim did not name Kumar, as reflected in the FIR, she later identified him as the offender, the court added.There is \u201cnothing on record at this stage\u201d to indicate that the child or her parents falsely tried to \u201cimplicate the respondent”, the court said. “However, evidence about the presence of the respondent from 8.13 am to 8.37 am on 30.04.2026 has been confirmed from CCTV footage,\u201d the court added. It was \u201ctoo early in the day to release the respondent on bail… ignoring the version of the victim,\u201d the court said.The sessions judge also failed to consider \u201ca very important fact that in junior school where the present incident took place. There were ten staff members out of which only two officials were male i.e. one guard namely Gopal and the respondent. Therefore, the child victim could not have made any mistake in identifying the culprit,\u201d the high court pointed out.Justice Kumar said the trial court \u201cmissed a very important fact that the victim is barely three years old and such a small child cannot be equated with an adult victim, who can narrate the facts in proper sequence with accuracy of time. A child of such tender age may appear to be incoherent and sometimes even illogical but that does not mean that what a child is saying is incorrect.\u201dThe counsel for the accused had denied the allegations of sexual assault, stating that the \u201cfoundational facts\u201d of the case cannot be sustained.The incident came to light on May 1 when the girl\u2019s mother filed a complaint at Janakpuri police station, alleging that her daughter was sexually assaulted during school hours by the accused.<\/div>\n