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
11 paragraphs · 397 wordsSavitri Ratho, J
This application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection Reamal P.S. Case No.06 of 2022 corresponding to Special G.R. Case No.03 of 2022 (arising out of C.T. Case No.13 of 2022), pending in the file of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Deogarh under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2) (n) (3), 506 of IPC read with Section 4 (2)/6 of the POCSO Act.
The prayer for bail of the petitioner had been rejected on 09.08.2023 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Deogarh.
The prosecution allegation in brief is that while the victim had gone to her uncle’s house to watch Television on 05.01.2022 at night, the accused forcibly dragged her towards the jungle area behind the house of one Sanjay and thereafter took away to a house situated in the village, Kendughati. Thereafter, he had sexual relations with her on a number of occasions. A man missing report was registered on 06.01.2022 and the victim was recovered on 12.01.2022 from village Kureibaga under Badagaon Police Station and the petitioner was arrested. Thereafter the case was turn to one under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2) (n) (3), 506 of IPC read with Section 4(2)/6 of the POCSO Act.
Mr. J.K.Padhi, learned counsel who has been engaged by the Orissa High Court Legal Aid Services on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2022 and investigation has been completed and chargesheet dated 02.03.2022 has been filed, but till date trial has not started. He further submits that the petitioner and the victim are known to each other for which the offences as alleged against the petitioner are not made out.
Mr.D.K.Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate opposes the prayer for bail stating that the age of the petitioner was 30 years and the age of the victim was about 13 years at the time of occurrence for which he does not deserve to be released on bail.
Considering the nature of allegations against the petitioner, his age and age of the victim, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
The BLAPL is accordingly dismissed.
It is open for the petitioner to move for bail afresh after examination of the victim girl in the trial.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
..…………………………….