The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's bail application in a rape and POCSO case, citing prima facie evidence and the nature of the charges despite allegations of delay.
Prayer for regular bail rejected; petitioner remains in judicial custody.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 4530 of 2019
Avinash Baraik ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Another ….. Opposite Parties
----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
----For the Petitioner: Mr. N. K. Gupta For the State: Mr. Shekhar Sinha, A.P.P -----
05/26.08.2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376DA/34 IPC and Sections 4/8 of the POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. There is inordinate delay in lodging of the F.I.R which shows that the present F.I.R has been lodged with afterthought. The medical examination of the victim girl was also done in which no sign of rape was found. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 12.11.2018 and as such he may be given the privilege of regular bail.
Learned A.P.P while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for bail, submits that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons committed rape upon the victim, who is a minor girl aged about 12 years. The statement of the victim girl has also been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C in which she has fully supported the allegation made against the petitioner in the F.I.R. As such, the petitioner may not be given the privilege of regular bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused of rape and POCSO offences under IPC and POCSO Act is entitled to regular bail.
Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and lack of physical signs of rape warrant bail.
Whether prima facie evidence supports rejection of bail prayer.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Avinash Baraik
The State of Jharkhand
Another
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
