Bail can’t be rejected for accused of POCSO if victim doesn’t want to step into witness box
KEYWORDS : POCSO ACT 2012, Low chances of bail under sec. 5 and 6 of POCSO ACT, 2012, case referred : Ravi Kumar vs. Union territory of J & K , sec. 436-A of Cr.P.C.
The order given by the Court presiding by Justice SANJAY DHAR in the case of ‘Ravi Kumar Vs. Union territory of J & K’ by granting bill reads as , ” It is not the case of the prosecution that trial is being delayed because of the conduct of the accused but it is a case where the victim is avoiding to step into the witness box. This conduct of the victim is sufficient to entitle the petitioner to concession of bail[1].”
Although chances of bail are very low under sec. 5 and 6 of POCSO act for the offence of kidnapping and sexual assault of child. But if the crime committed by the accused is not proved in the court, then he can’t be detained for the time period of more than one half of the maximum punishment decided for the offence under sec. 436-A of Cr.P.C.
Under the aforesaid case, High Court at first didn’t accepted the application of bail granted to the accused cause of victim being absent during the trial of the case and she was yet to be recorded for imparting the judgment of the case. Plea was again dismissed for the same reasons.
But when victim could not be traced by the investigating agency, then taking into accounts the provision of sec. 436-A of Cr.P.C. , it was observed that rights of he accused can’t be avoided and denied further. So, Justice Dhar granted him bail on conditions that he can’t leave state without permission and with surety of the submission of the like amount of Rs. 50,000/- furnishing the personal bond .
Written By : Chanchal, College Name : GLA University, Mathura, Semester 2nd, an intern under Legal Vidhiya
[1] https://www.barandbench.com/news/bail-cannot-be-denied-to-pocso-accused-if-victim-avoids-stepping-into-witness-box-jammu-kashmir-high-court
0 Comments