The Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail application of a 62-year-old man who raped a three-year-old girl.
A single-judge bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Sunil.
Applicant Sunil approached the Court by way of filing the Criminal Misc Bail Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C after rejection of his Bail Application order dated 15.06.2021, passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Kannauj, in Case under Section 376 I.P.C and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kannauj, District Kannauj.
The applicant is seeking bail for allegedly committing an offence which is shocking and inhuman.
It is alleged that applicant, a carpenter, committed offence of rape with the victim, a minor girl of three years old.
The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC has communicated by words and also by action that applicant has raped her and blood was oozing out from her private parts. The applicant was apprehended from the spot and a named FIR was lodged against him.
The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a 62 years old person. There was a delay of about five days in lodging the FIR. He was falsely implicated in the present case. He was doing some carpentry in the house of the father of the victim, however there was a dispute on payment of wages. The applicant has no prior criminal antecedents and he has been in jail since 15.03.2021.
The Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State opposed the bail and drew the Court’s attention to the contents of FIR as well as the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC wherein she completely corroborated the prosecution case. 6(A) Law on bail is well settled that ‘Bail is the rule and Jail is the exception’. Bail should not be granted or rejected in a mechanical manner as it concerns liberty of a person.
The AGA said that, at the time of considering an application for bail, the Court must take into account certain factors such as existence of a prima facie case against the accused, gravity of the allegations, severity of punishment, position and status of the accused, likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the Courts as well as criminal antecedents of the accused.
(B) It is also well settled that the Court while considering an application for bail must not go into deep merits of the matter such as the question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses which can only be tested during the trial. Even ground of parity is one of the above mentioned aspects which are essentially required to be considered. It is also well settled that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner, compassionately and not in a whimsical manner.
(C) The Court should record the reasons which have weighed with the count for the exercise of its discretionary power for an order granting or rejecting bail. Conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.
“In the background of above facts and legal position of the case, it is prima facie evident that the applicant has committed an inhuman act of rape on a minor girl of three years. The victim has narrated her ordeal in words as well as in signs and explained the entire incident of rape committed by the applicant. Medical report shows that the victim’s hymen was torn and there was swelling on her private parts. The applicant, who has prima facie, committed a heinous crime of rape on a three years old minor girl, is not entitled for bail”
-the Court observed while rejecting the bail application.