Single judge rejected bail appeal regarding charges of child sexual abuse under POCSO and IT Act. Court held bail prayer devoid of merit amidst strict penalties and rejected victim's medical opinion.
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 ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.62 of 2021 Ananta Singh …. Appellant
Ananta Singh
Mr. Mahes Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha …. Respondent Mr. Sk. Zafrulla, Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI
Order No. ORDER
05.07.2021
06 .
1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
3. This CRLA has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 16.04.2020 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Kendrapara in connection with Pattamundai P.S. Case No. 316 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 67 of 2019, registered under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) and 506 of I.P.C., Section 6 of POCSO Act, Section 67, 67(A), 67(B) of Information Technology Act and under Section 3 of S.C. & S.T.(P.A.) Act., wherein the learned court below has rejected the bail application of the appellant.
4. The prosecution has alleged that on 01.10.2019, the respondent no.2 lodged an F.I.R. before the Pattamundai P.S. falsely alleging therein that for last eight months the present appellant was in illicit relationship with her minor daughter. It has been further alleged that the appellant had taken nude pics
// 2 //
of her daughter and had forwarded the same to his friends. It has been further alleged that the appellant had threatened to kill her daughter if she discloses this fact to anybody.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the police arrested the appellant on 03.10.2019. On being forwarded to court, his bail application was rejected and he was sent to jail. After charge-sheet was filed, his fresh bail application was also rejected vide order dated 16.04.2020. The medical examination report of the victim has not been taken into consideration wherein the doctor has opined that there is no bodily injury suggesting sexual intercourse and that there is no sign or symptom of recent sexual intercourse. Taking into account the detention of the appellant in judicial custody, he should be enlarged on bail.
6. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the appellant.
7. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, character of evidence appearing against the appellant, the stringent punishment provided and there are reasonable grounds for believing that the appellant is not guilty of the offence alleged or not likely to commit any such offence, which is not possible to record in this case, the appellant’s prayer for bail is devoid of merit. Hence, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
9. As the Lock-down period is continuing for COVID-19, learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No. 4798 dated 15th April, 2021.
(S. K. Panigrahi)
DUTTA/ LNB
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the appellant challenged in this criminal reference.
Ananta Singh
State of Odisha
S. K. Panigrahi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
