IMPORTANT POINT
The testimony of the prosecutrix for an offence under Section 376 of the IPC does not require corroboration as long as it inspires confidence, but corroboration is essential for allegations under the POCSO Act. The presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act raises the threshold for granting bail in post-charge stage.

JUDGMENT

Amit Mahajan, J.

1. The present petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking grant of regular bail in FIR No. 973/2022 for offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) registered at Police Station Mangol Puri.

2. It is alleged that on 28.07.2022, at around 3:00 p.m., when the prosecutrix was returning home with her sister's children, the applicant forced the children outside the lift and thereafter made forceful relations with the prosecutrix.

3. It is further alleged that on the next day, that is, 29.07.2022, when the prosecutrix was alone at home, the applicant came and made forceful relations with the prosecutrix again and afterwards also threatened the prosecutrix of dire consequences if she told anyone about the incident. The applicant was thereafter arrested on 15.08.2022.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a carpenter by profession and was at the relevant time working in the same society where the prosecutrix resides and both were in talking terms.

5. He submits that the applicant is of young age of 22 years approximately, and the prosecutrix had friendly relations with him and used to talk on phone on regular basis. He submits that the statement given by the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the CrPC does not inspire confidence as she refers to one `Ranjan' who is alleged to have committed the offence.

6. He further submits that the applicant was arrested in a mischievous way by a Beat Officer while patrolling. The Beat Officer has stated in his statement under Section 161 of the CrPC, that he saw a man who was trying to avoid facing anyone and to which he got suspicious and stopped that man and was able to identify him as the one whose photograph was shown to him by the Officer at the Police Station.

7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the prosecutrix, in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC, has supported the case of the prosecution.

8. He submits that the prosecutrix has also identified the applicant as the accused at the Police Station and also in Court. He submits that the applicant was arrested pursuant to a photograph that was provided by the prosecutrix.

9. He submits that the present applicant impersonated himself as `Ranjan' to the prosecutrix and therefore, the said name is mentioned by her in the complaint.

Analysis

10. The Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Bihar v. Rajballav Prasad, 2017 (2) SCC 178, in relation to offences under POCSO, had held that, while considering the application for bail at a post charge stage, the Court also has to consider the provisions of Section 29 of the POCSO Act. Section 29 of the POCSO Act reads as under:

"29. Presumption as to certain offences Where a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under sections 3, 5, 7 and section 9 of this Act, the Special Court shall presume, that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence, as the case may be unless the contrary is proved."

11. After charges have been framed, the provisions of Section 29 of the POCSO Act have to be considered, which raises the threshold of satisfaction required before a bail can be granted. The Court has to evaluate albeit, prima facie, the evidence relied upon by the prosecution.

12. Certain considerations that have to be kept in mind while deciding the application in relation to offences under POCSO Act are; the age of the minor victim vis-a-vis the age of the accused, the relationship, if any, between the victim and the accused, whether the accused is a repeated offender, the chances of the accused threatening the victim after being enlarged on bail etc.

13. I have perused the chargesheet filed in the present case. The present case is solely based on the testimony of t