Love Affair

The Supreme Court has said that the grounds such as “there was a romantic relationship” between the accused and the girl and an alleged “refusal to get married” won’t have any bearing on granting bail to the POCSO case.

An appeals court bench consisting of justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant stayed the decision by a single judge from Jharkhand High Court granting bail to the accused in a case registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012 and IPC.

READ MORE: Karnataka: All govt, private hospitals to discontinue precautionary covid testing.

The court stated, “The High Court was manifestly wrong in granting the bail application. The reason for this is that, based on the statements in Section of 164, and from the allegations contained in the FIR that there was a love affair between the appellant’s wife and second respondent as well as in that case, the matter was brought because of the refusal of the second respondent to wed the appellant is a lie”.

The bench stated, “Once it is evident that it appears from the evidence in the Court that the appellant was just 13 years old at the date that the accused offense occurred and both the reasons for the alleged offense, which is that there was a romance that took place with the defendant (girl) with the other respondent (accused) and the allegation that the appellant refused to get married and the fact that they were not married have no impact on the bail granted”.

In its ruling, which was issued on Monday, the court stated that “having consideration of the prosecutor’s age as well as the nature and seriousness of the crime, there was no reason for the granting bail was made.”

“The decision from the High Court granting bail has to be overturned as the circumstances that prevailed before this High Court are extraneous in light of the prosecutor’s age in light of the regulations of Section 376 of IPC and the Section 6 in POCSO. We, therefore, rescind the impugned judgment by the High Court dated August 2, 2021,” the court declared.

The bench ordered that the accused immediately surrender to custody.

Advocate senior Anand Grover and advocate Fauzia Shakil, who appeared on behalf of the child, argued that the victim’s birth date was Jan. 1, 2005, as at the time of the accused offense, she was thirteen years old.

In response to the argument by lawyer Rajesh Ranjan, representing the defendant, he is an undergraduate student at an engineering college and won’t be granted bail throughout his trial.

The court asked that in the light of the particular circumstances, the Special Judge POCSO, who is responsible for
the prosecution must conclude this trial within six months of receiving an official copy of the order.

Mr. Grover said, “Having regard to the rules that are contained in Section 376 IPC and POCSO, the reasons that were considered by those of the High Court are, ex evidently, bogus and the bail application shouldn’t be allowed”.

However, Mr. Ranjan said that even though the charge sheet has been filed, there has been no evidence of the sexually explicit videos, nor do we have any medical evidence to suggest that the girl was involved in any sexual encounter with the person being accused.

The court of supreme appeal observed that on the 27th of January 2021, an FIR was filed in the Kanke police station in the Ranchi district for offenses punishable by Section 376 under the Indian Penal and provisions of the POCSO Act.

In the FIR, it was stated by the girl who petitioned for the FIR that at the time of the incident moment, she was still a minor, one of the respondents (accused) was taking her to a residence hotel and entered into an intimate relationship with her on the condition of marrying her.

She claimed she was accused of not being willing to marry her and that he had sent inappropriate video clips to her dad.

It was noted that the request for bail anticipatory filed by an accused person was denied by the Judge Special POCSO, Ranchi, on February 18, 2021.

The accused was released on the 3rd of April, 2021, and requested bail.