The High Court did not entertain an application for anticipatory bail filed by a petitioner implicated in a POCSO case involving offences under IPC sections 377, 294, and 506. The court dismissed the application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the nature of the accusation and available materials.
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.
ABLAPL No.13399 of 2020
The matter is taken up through video conferencing.
The petitioner having been implicated in connection with Madanpur Rampur P.S. Case No.124 of 2020 corresponding to C.T. Case No.59 of 2020 on the file of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under POCSO Court Act, Bhawanipatna running for alleged commission of offence under sections 377/294/506 of the IPC read with section 6 of the POCSO Act has filed this application under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for his release on bail in the event of his arrest in the said case.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Considering the submission and the nature of accusation as also the materials available concerning the role of this petitioner; I am not inclined to entertain this application for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands dismissed.
H
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be entertained given the nature of the accusation.
Whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail in a case under sections 377/294/506 IPC read with section 6 POCSO Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Petitioner
State
_H_
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
