AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 262 wordsRavi Malimath, J
This revision is filed seeking for grant of bail to the revisionist.
The case of the prosecution is that a complaint was filed on 27.08.2020 by the father of the victim stating that the victim consumed poison on 23.08.2020 after which she was admitted in the Medicity Hospital, Rudrapur. She was in the ICU. On 26.08.2020, she told that she was raped by Sonu Shah who lives in the neighbourhood. On the basis of the complaint, the investigation was initiated and the statement of the victim was recorded by the police in the hospital and the medical examination was conducted on 31.08.2020. Thereafter, she was discharged from the hospital. The revisionist was 17 years old at the time of commission of offence. He was a student and had passed class 12th. The victim was aged about 14 years. Her statement clearly indicates about the commission of offence by the revisionist. The revisionist raped her on 15th and 16th February when she was alone at home. She was also physically assaulted. The revisionist forced her again for the physical relationship. She could not convey it to her parents in fear and, thereafter, she consumed poison to avoid shame in the society. On all these grounds, the juvenile court rejected the appeal.
On considering the contentions, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the revisionist on bail. The revisionist has committed a heinous crime against the minor. The minor has clearly stated in her statement that the revisionist has committed rape.
The revision is dismissed.