The severity of the offence and the potential impact of granting bail upon the society were central to the court's decision.

JUDGMENT

Chander Shekhar, J. - This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) by the petitioner for the grant of bail.

2. Brief stated, the facts of the case allegedly are that, on 8.1.2017, two women, namely, Surinder Kaur and Paramjeet Kaur came to the police station Khayala, Delhi with an abandoned minor girl. Thereafter, W/SI Neelam enquired the matter and the victim girl was medically examined at Guru Gobind Singh Hospital. After her medical examination, the victim girl was admitted to Nari Niketan.

3. On 11.4.2017, an information was received from Nari Niketan that the victim girl stated that she was sexually assaulted. Upon this, W/SI Ranjana was deputed and she recorded the statement of the victim girl in the presence of the Welfare Officer on the same day and the instant FIR No.105/2017, dated 12.04.2017, under Sections 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Sections 4/5/6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 was registered.

4. The investigation of the case was marked to W/SI Neelam and the victim was medically examined. Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C was also recorded. During the investigation, the mobile phone of the victim was seized and search of accused person was carried out, but he could not be traced.

5. Thereafter, further investigation of the case was marked to Inspector Rajni Chopra. During the course of investigation, local enquiries were conducted and the statement of the witnesses, namely, Surinder Kaur and Paramjeet Kaur and other public witnesses were recorded. In her statement, Surinder Kaur stated that the victim girl was brought by her and Pramjeet Kaur from the house of Prem Prakash (the petitioner herein). After this statement, the house of the petitioner was searched, but he was not found there and was evading arrest.

6. On this, non-bailable warrant was issued and the proceedings under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C were initiated against the petitioner. Thereafter, on 4.9.2018, the petitioner was arrested and in his disclosure statement, he admitted to the crime and disclosed that one Rama Tripathi and one Sunita are involved in human trafficking. The whereabouts of Rama Tripathi and Sunita as well as her brother-in-law could not be known. Thereafter, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and the charges under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act were framed against the petitioner vide order dated 1.12.2018.

7. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner had filed a bail application before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed vide order dated 5.11.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner had moved another bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., which was also dismissed by the Sessions Court vide order dated 14.1.2019. Third bail application filed by the petitioner before the Sessions Court was also dismissed vide order dated 7.3.2019.

8. It would be quite relevant to reproduce the orders dated 5.11.2018, 14.1.2019 and 7.3.2019 which, respectively, read as follows:

"ORDER DATED 5.11.2018

Reply filed by the IO.

The instant bail application has been taken up along with the case file/charge-sheet of the instant case. The IO submits that victim is at Uttarpara, Hoogly, West Bengal and she could not be contacted and, therefore, she has no information about the instant bail application.

I have heard the detailed submissions and have perused the record carefully.

It has been argued by Ld. Counsel for applicantaccused Prem Prakash that actual dispute between the victim and the applicant-accused relate to payment of salary. The victim was in fact domestic help in the house of applicant-accused Prem Prakash. It is also submitted that in the statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. of witness Smt. Surender Kaur, the address of the applicant-accused is mentioned as Flat No. 183, Shivaji Enclave, New Delhi. She also stated that o