Asik vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
- Neutral2024:AHC:135106
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a victim in a case involving alleged sexual offence against a minor has made a statement during trial that establishes prima facie commission of the offence, and the period of incarceration has not yet reached the threshold of prolonged detention, bail may be refused even though the trial is incomplete, provided that the court reserves liberty for the applicant to seek bail if trial is not substantially advanced within a reasonable timeframe.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Heard Sri Chandan Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for applicant and Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for State.
Applicant has again approached this Court seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.353 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(1)dh and 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Phoolpur, District-Azamgarh.
This is second bail application. First bail application was rejected on 29.05.2023 mainly on ground that statement of victim was not recorded till date.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that subsequently, statement of victim has been recorded wherein she has stated that she on her own will stayed with applicant and made physical relationship also. Learned counsel further submits that age of victim as disclosed by her in her statement, she may be a major girl on date of occurrence. Applicant is in jail since 17.12.2022 i.e. about 1 year and 8 months.
Learned A.G.A for State has opposed the bail and submits that statement of victim is against applicant and she has specifically stated that there was a physical relationship with applicant and since she is a minor girl, therefore, her consent, if any, is immaterial.
In pursuance of an order passed by this Court, learned Trial Court has submitted a status report dated 16.08.2024 that out of 15 proposed witnesses, 6 witnesses have been examined and trial could be concluded expeditiously.
In order to appreciate above submission I have carefully perused the statement of victim recorded during trial that she has specifically stated that she along with applicant stayed together for about one month and have made physical relationship, therefore, prima facie the offence has been made out. The Court also takes note of a recent judgment passed by Supreme Court in Re. Right to Privacy of Adolecents, 2024 INSC 614.
In the aforesaid circumstances, period of incarceration could not fall within the parameter of prolong detention, therefore, prayer for bail is rejected. However, it is observed that in case, trial is not much proceeded within 8 months from today, applicant will have liberty to approach this Court or Trial Court, as advised.
Meanwhile, Trial Court will proceed expeditiously to conclude the trial within aforesaid period, if there is no legal impediment.
Accordingly, application is disposed of with aforesaid observation.
Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.
Order Date :- 22.8.2024
P. Pandey
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free