IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that in cases involving serious allegations under the POCSO Act, strict compliance with procedural requirements is essential to protect the rights of victims and ensure a fair trial.

ORDER :

1. This case is a classic example of “The protector turning into the predator.”

2. This Suo Moto Criminal Petition for cancellation of bail was registered by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2023, after coming across the news articles published in two newspapers, namely “Purvanchal Prahari” and “The Arunachal Times” regarding grant of bail by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh, vide order dated 23.02.2023 to the accused/respondent Yumken Bagra.

3. Facts in nutshell, relevant and essential for disposal of this Suo Moto Cancellation of Bail petition are noted herein-below:

The accused/respondent was working as a Hostel Warden in the Government Residential School at Karo Village, Monigong, Shi Yomi District in Arunachal Pradesh. The father of the twin minor girls, being the boarders in the said hostel, lodged a written complaint dated 01.11.2022 alleging interaliathat the Hostel Warden, i.e. accused/respondent herein, had indulged in sexual assault, harassment, molestation and attempted rape upon the minor victims on multiple occasions. It was also alleged that the hapless victims were forced to watch porn movies. Upon receiving the said report, FIR No. 2/2023 came to be registered in Moningong Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 10/12/14(1)/15(1)/2 of the POCSO Act. The accused/respondent was arrested on 13.11.2022. The co-accused, Daniel Pertin, was arrested on 14.11.2022 on the charge of harbouring the accused/respondent herein. The investigation revealed a gravely distressing story that as many as 21 tender aged child victims residing in the hostel were sexually assaulted by the accused/respondent. The statements of the victims were recorded, who gave harrowing accounts of them having been the victims of ghastly crimes committed by the accused, ranging from sexual harassment to rape. They were also physically hurt by the accused/respondent. Boys as young as 6 years to 10 years were sexually molested. A few of the children also disclosed that they tried to commit suicide because of the atrocities they faced at the hands of the accused. Not only this, the victims were forced to consume psychotropic drugs which were seized by the Investigating Officer during investigation. The mobile phone of the accused was also seized. The gory trail of sexual assault on the young victims continued for years together. The victims further stated that the children who objected were beaten up by the accused/respondent. The statements of the victims have been corroborated by medical examination, because four of the girl victims were found with their hymen torn. All these girls were roughly of 12 to 15 years of age when they were sexually assaulted.

4. The charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused/ respondent and the co-accused Daniel Pertin on 27.01.2023. Two previous bail applications filed by the accused/respondent were dismissed by the Special Judge, POCSO, Yupia. However, vide order dated 23.02.2023, the learned trial court accepted the third Bail Application filed by the accused/respondent, which order is under scrutiny in this Suo Motobail cancellation petition.

5. A perusal of the order dated 23.02.2023 would reveal that the learned Special Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the application for bail. The petition for bail was filed by the accused/respondent on 22.02.2023 by impleading the complainant as party/respondent, but the Special Judge did not issue notice to the complainant and proceeded to accept the successive bail application on the very next day i.e. 23.02.2023 by assigning an absolutely flimsy reasoning, which reads as follows:

“9..........The statements of these victims reveal a grave offence having committed upon them, however, the trial is yet to begin due to non-appearance of co-accused Daniel Pertin.

10. Having regard to the nature of allegation levelled against him, this court is inclined to grant bail to the accused with a condition:

i. That accused shall execute