"Grant Of Bail Requires More Than Cursory Appraisal": SC Sets Aside Bail Granted To Police Officer Accused Of Raping Minor Girl
The Supreme Court set aside the bail granted to a Station House Officer (SHO) accused of raping a minor victim.
The case, arising from FIR No. 41 of 2022 at Police Station Pali, District Lalitpur, Uttar Pradesh, involves serious charges under Sections 363, 376, 376-B, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was also added subsequently
The Appellant, who is the mother of the victim, challenged the bail granted to the accused, who held the position of SHO at the police station where the crime allegedly occurred. The prosecution alleged that the accused, entrusted with the victim's custody in connection with a complaint of sexual assault, himself committed the heinous act.
The Bench of Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was examining whether the Allahabad High Court was justified in granting regular bail to him.
In a previous ruling, this Court deliberated on the matter of granting bail to a police official accused of abusing their position, as seen in the case of State of Jharkhand vs. Sandeep Kumar (2024 INSC 179). The Court had firmly rejected any leniency in such circumstances, emphasizing that accused policemen should not receive preferential treatment akin to ordinary citizens accused of similar offenses, even when the allegations do not pertain to a heinous crime.
"In the present case, the situation is far worse as respondent No.1, being the Station House Officer of the Police Station, where the minor victim girl was brought for securing her justice, is alleged to have resorted to committing the same heinous crime of raping her," the Court noted.
The Bench observed, "In this situation, his prayer for grant of bail required more than the cursory appraisal that was bestowed by the High Court. We do not find any reasons worth the name justifying the grant of bail to respondent No.1 at this stage."
While allowing the Appeal, the Court ordered, "..setting aside the order dated 02.03.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 43236 of 2022. Respondent No.1 shall surrender forthwith, failing which the State shall take necessary steps to apprehend him and send him to judicial custody.
Cause Title: D v. Tilakdhari Saroj and Ors.
Appearance:-
Petitioner: Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka, Advocates Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Bhuwan Ribhu, Rachna Tyagi, Saksham Maheshwari (AOR), Bindita Chatuvedi, Suraj Kumar
Respondent: Advocates Amardeep Sharma, Arun Kumar Saini, Chandra Nand Jha, Chiranjeev Johri, Preeti, Pradeep Kumar Mathur (AOR), Senior Advocate A.K.Misra (A.G), Arup Banerjee (AOR), Ajay Singh, Prakash Sharma, Priyanshu Raj, Rajiv Agnihotri, R.K. Dey, Sanjeev Sharma
Click here to read/download the Order
