Spread the love

NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court rejecting the anticipatory Bail of petitioner by the evidence of CCTV footage.  On the recent hearing in the Delhi High Court where Accused of multiple charges under Prevention of Child  From Sexual Offences Act,2012 (POCSO) and Indian Penal Code(I.P.C) for the harassment. On 17th November  2023, Victim( minor at the timer of incident) coming back to her house from the temple later she found that the  Accused who’s sitting next to her was confronted and giving her bad sign and gesture to her modesty later by  the act he was not stop then pressed her chest before fleeing. After the incident took place victim was not  mentally able to fight and she went to the Police Station, FIR has been lodged under multiple Sections  354/354A/354D/509 of Indian Penal Code. As mentioning earlier Victim was minor at the time of incident so  the Section 8/12 of POCSO also were lodged the same.  

Furthermore, Hon’ble High Court listened the contention of the both party for learned counsel for the petitioner  has contented that the by the Prima Facia of the fact and using the CCTV footage of nearby shops of the temple,  argued that the demeanour of the Victim don’t suggest the any proof of the harassment happened to her.  Contention from learned counsel for the State (Victim) was that Accused were the Habitual criminal and he’s  done multiple crime on back dates like 2008 and 2012 and he had a background which our society will not  acceptable at any cost so granting bail him to giving him opportunists to ruin more lives of girls, and the  statement recorded under Section 164 of Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which clearly corroborated with  her earlier complaint and leveled specific allegations against the petitioner.  

By the hearing of both side court found out that the proximity by the petitioner for the Victims that she was not  minor at the time of incident were inconsistent with the fact and by the evidence of CCTV footage which  clearly shows the present of the Accused at Crime scene and Court also reject his Non-Bailment Warrant  against him. And court also observed the Victim’s vulnerability and seriousness of the crime and ongoing the  investigation could be interrupted by the accused so it dismissed the petitioner’s anticipatory bail plea.  

CONCLUSION: Delhi High Court denied anticipatory bail to a man accused of inappropriate gestures and  chest-grabbing of a minor girl. The victim, 17 at the time, stood by her claims in court. CCTV footage offered  conflicting evidence, but the court prioritised the victim’s age, seriousness of POCSO charges, and the accused’s  evasion of investigation, dismissing his plea. This decision, while not pre-judging the trial, underscores the  court’s commitment to protecting minors and upholding POCSO.  



Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.


Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *