Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Vikender Singh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Bail Appln. 363 of 2023
Decided On : 29-08-2023
BAIL APPLICATION - Regular Bail - The court granted bail to the applicant, a Sub Inspector in CISF, who was charged under Section 354 of IPC and Section 10 of POCSO Act for making a bad touch to an 11-year-old victim. The court imposed several conditions for bail, including the applicant's relocation from the victim's residential colony.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for regular bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C. in a case involving charges under Section 354 of IPC and Section 10 of POCSO Act. The victim, an 11-year-old, accused the applicant of making a bad touch on her.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted bail to the applicant, subject to various conditions, after considering the seriousness of the offense, the applicant's custody period, and the victim's statement.
Issues: The main issue was the grant of bail to the applicant, considering the serious nature of the offense and the victim's age.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the applicant's custody period, his occupation as a Sub Inspector in CISF, and the victim's statement in reaching the decision to grant bail with specific conditions.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant on the condition that he relocates from the victim's residential colony and complies with other specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 2964/2023
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
BAIL APPLN. 363/2023
1. The present application has been filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 398/2022registered at PS Vasant Kunj under Section 354 of IPC and Section 10 of POCSO Act.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been in custody since 02.09.2022 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. It has further been submitted that the applicant is a Sub Inspector in CISF and has an unblemished record.
3. Learned APP for the state has opposed the bail application on the ground that the offense is serious in nature.
4. The Prosecutrix is present in person. I have talked to the prosecutrix in-camera.
5. In the present case, the FIR was lodged on 02.09.2022 wherein the victim stated that on a day before the registration of the present FIR, she was taught about the good touch and bad touch in the school. Thereafter she realised that on 05.12.2021 applicant had put his hands inside the clothes of the prosecutrix and had made a bad touch. The victim is around 11 years of age.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is presently residing in the same colony where the victim and her family are residing. But he is ready to shift from that colony and will reside at some other place which shall be beyond the 5 km radius of the victim's house.
7. In these circumstances, the applicant is admitted to bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the following conditions:
a) the Applicant will shift from his current residential colony and will reside at some other place which shall be beyond the 5 km radius of the victim's house;
b) the applicant shall appear before the Trial Court and attend the proceedings as and when required;
c) the Applicant shall under no circumstances leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned;
d) the Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case;
e) the Applicant shall provide his mobile number(s) to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times;
f) In case of a change of residential address and/or mobile number, the Applicant shall intimate the same to the Court concerned by way of an affidavit.
8. The application stands disposed of.
The court has the discretion to grant bail, even in serious cases, subject to imposing appropriate conditions to ensure the safety and compliance of the accused.
The court considered the grounds for granting bail, including the prima facie case, the possibility of the accused being away from the cause of justice, and the possibility of intimidating or threate....
The court emphasized the need to balance the presumption of guilt under POCSO Act with the right to bail, considering the stage of trial and the applicant's circumstances.
Granting bail in cases involving serious allegations requires consideration of the specific circumstances and the need to await the appreciation of evidence by the trial court.
The court considered the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner's responsibility for four children in deciding the bail application.
The court considered the period of detention and the seriousness of the allegations in deciding to admit the petitioner to court bail.
The presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act applies, and the significant age difference between the accused and the victim renders the alleged crime particularly heinous.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
