In this bail application, the High Court rejected the plea for bail filed by Dushyant accused under POCSO and IPC sections for attempting to ravish a 12-year-old girl, directing the trial court to conclude the trial within four months.
Bail application rejected; trial to be concluded within four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1960 of 2019
Applicant :- Dushyant Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Dhananjay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of applicant Dushyant in connection with Case Crime No. 202 of 2018 under Sections 376, 511, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Jarcha, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.
Heard Sri Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that there is variation between the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. with that made under Section 164 Cr.P.C., though, both are inculpatory. It has been emphasized that though the allegation is that the applicant dragged the prosecutrix inside a Jwaar field forcibly but a perusal of the site plan relating to the place of occurrence and the injury relating to the prosecutrix shows that there was neither any damage to the crop of Jwaar nor the prosecutrix sustained any injury. It is alleged that the applicant is a friend of hers and was familiar with the prosecutrix and had seen her along with two school girls in an objectionable condition with some unknown boys on 04.09.2018. On that account, he warned the boys and in good faith, also informed the prosecutrix's father. It is submitted that the matter became a gossip in the area. The aforesaid submission has been made on the foot of allegations carried in paragraph no. 12 of the affidavit. It is submitted that the father of the prosecutrix, instead of considering the information in the right perspective took it as an act of character assassination of his daughter and got the applicant implicated on false charges in the present case.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the prosecutrix is a girl aged about 12 years and has categorically come up with an allegation about the applicant dragging her into a field, and attempting to ravish her. It is said that some children arrived, on account of which, she escaped. It
is submitted that the act of attempting to ravish a young girl of 12 years by a matured man is a menace to the society and has to be dealt with firmly. The applicant cannot be let off on a specious plea.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, in particular, the fact that the prosecutrix is a young girl of 12 years, the fact that she has categorically come up with an allegation of attempted rape in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
The trial court is directed to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within four months next from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate strict coercive measures to ensure their presence. Once, the witnesses appear, they will not be discharged until their evidence is recorded.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 16.1.2019
Deepak
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving attempted rape of a 12-year-old child.
Whether the court is directed to expedite proceedings under Section 309 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinod Kumar vs. State of PunjabReferred¶12
2015 (3) SCC 220 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dushyant
J.J. Munir
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
J.J. Munir
Parties & counsel
