The court denied bail due to the serious nature of allegations involving sexual abuse of minors, emphasizing victim protection and the integrity of the investigation.

ORDER :

(M.R. MENGDEY, J.)

1. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11203038230417 of 2023 registered with Mangrol Police Station, Junagadh for the offences punishable under Sections 377, 506(2), 323, 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Sections 4, 8, 12, 17, 5(c), 5(f), 5(l), 5(o) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that in the present offence the investigation is over and and charge sheet has been filed. The Applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 23.10.2023 and since then the Applicant is in the custody. The Applicant had earlier preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 767 of 2024 which was allowed to be withdrawn by this Court vide rorder dated 12.01.2024. The Applicant was permitted by this Court to file Application afresh after nine months if the trial did not proceed in the meantime. Thereafter the Applicant had preferred another Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 7167 of 2024 which was also allowed to be withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 19.04.2024. Thereafter, since there is no progress whatsoever in the trial and even the charge hadn't been framed against the present Applicant, the present Applicant had preferred the present Application. He further submitted that the first informant has lodged the FIR against the present Applicant only on the basis of hearsay evidence. No untoward incident whatsoever has taken place with the first informant - victim. At best, the Applicant can be kept out of the area wherein the first informant and the other witnesses are residing. He has further submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that there is a strong prima facie case against the present Applicant for commission of the offence in question. He submitted that the first informant and the other victims were studying in the Madresa at which the present Applicant was working and the Applicant had subjected the first informant and other victims to sexual abuse. Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The present FIR had been lodged by the first informant who himself was a victim to the crime committed by the present Applicant. It is alleged in the FIR that the first informant was a student of the Madresa wherein the present Applicant was working. The Applicant herein had called the first informant in his room. However, the first informant could get an indication about the evil plan of the present Applicant for commission of the offence in question and therefore had successfully escaped from the place. However, the record indicates that there are other victims like the first informant who had been subjected to sexual abuse by the present Applicant and those victims have also given their statements under Section 164 of Cr. P.C. The first informant and the other victims were of a very tender age at the relevant time.

6. Having regard to the aforesaid aspect, no case is made out. The Application is dismissed.