Ravi v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Delhi granted bail to a detainee in a POCSO case, observing significant contradictions and inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's statements and the lack of corroborative evidence, despite the prosecution's opposition based on the victim's age and coerced video recording.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of ₹15,000 with one surety of like amount.
What the court decided
$~8
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- BAIL APPLN. 88/2020
RAVI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Jitender Singh, Adv.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State SI Heema Chaudhary, PS Sarai Rohilla
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT O R D E R % 03.03.2020
- Present petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in FIR No. 268/2018 registered at P.S. Sarai Rohilla for offences punishable under Section 376/328/506/509/34 IPC and Section 6/12/17 Of POCSO Act.
- As per the allegations in FIR, prosecutrix/complainant stated in her statement that she was about 16 years and had studied upto 12th standard. She further stated that there is a factory of hosiery clothes near her house where a boy, namely, Ravi (petitioner herein) used to work, with whom she became friend in December 2017. In January 2018, on the pretext of his friend’s birthday, petitioner took her to a party at Tri Nagar where she consumed cold drink and thereafter, she became unconscious. On regaining consciousness, her body was cloth less and she was having pain in her
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in a POCSO case where the prosecution case appears contradictory and the petitioner faces no immediate threat to society.
Whether the discrepancies in the prosecutrix's statements justify granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
What bond amount and surety conditions are appropriate for the petitioner's release.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
RAVI
- respondent
STATE
Coram
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court