Mere Long Detention In Jail Does Not Entitle An Accused For Bail: Allahabad HC Denies Bail In POCSO Case
|The Allahabad High Court denied the bail application of an accused in a POCSO case observing that mere long detention in jail did not entitle an accused to bail.
The Lucknow Bench noted that the accused had been in jail since 2022 awaiting trial for offences under Sections 376AB and 506 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The Court pointed out that Section 29 of the POCSO Act provided for a “presumption” for certain offences. “It provides that if a person is prosecuted for violating any provision of Sections 3, 5, 7 & 9 of the Act and where the victim is a child below the age of 16 years, the Special Court shall presume that such person has committed the offence, unless the contrary is proved,” the Court explained.
A Single Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan observed, “Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the issue in question, medical examination report, statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the provisions of law i.e. Section 375 IPC, Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, I do not find any substance in the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant...I am conscious about the fact that the guilt of any person can be established before the learned trial court and no observation should be given affecting the trial, but on the basis of aforesaid material available on record, prima facie, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present applicant.”
Advocate Alok Srivastava represented the applicant, while AGA Rajnish Kumar Verma appeared for the opposite party.
As per the prosecution, the accused had committed oral sex on a 12-year-old minor victim and “penetrated the penis in her way of urine.” To this, Court explained, “It is well settled that to constitute an offence of rape complete penetration of penis with emission of semen and the rupture of hymen is not necessary.”
The Court stated that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. had categorically informed that the accused had committed oral sex with her. Since the victim was about 12 years old at the time of the incident, the Bench remarked that there could not be a presumption at the stage of bail that the victim had given such a statement under the influence of her parents.
“Mere long detention in jail does not entitle an accused for bail. Further, it all depends on the facts and circumstances of each case as there is no straight jacket formula for granting bail. Therefore, period of long incarceration may be considered as one of the grounds for granting bail, but it depends upon facts and circumstances of the particular case,” the Court remarked.
Accordingly, the High Court rejected the bail application.
Cause Title: Pradum Singh v. State Of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:41454)
Appearance:
Applicant: Advocate Alok Srivastava
Opposite Party: AGA Rajnish Kumar Verma; Advocates Aslam Javed Siddiqui and Munna Singh