Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J
Rohit Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 16 of 2023, dated 25.2.2023, registered for the commission of offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), at Police Station Pachhad, District Sirmour, H.P. As per the prosecution’s case, the victim was well acquainted with the petitioner. The petitioner called and raped her in the year 2021. He again called her to his room in September, 2022 and raped her. The victim became pregnant. The petitioner is innocent, and he was falsely implicated. The parties were in a relationship for a long period, and they were known to each other. The petitioner has been behind the bars since 26.2.2023, and the matter was listed for prosecution evidence on 23.4.2025. It will take some time to conclude the trial. The petitioner would abide by the terms and conditions which the Court may impose. Hence, the petition.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the police received information from the Regional Hospital,
The court emphasized that the heinous nature of the crime and the evidence against the petitioner justified the denial of bail, despite claims of trial delays.
The court emphasized that bail in heinous offences against minors is not granted lightly, considering the nature of the crime and the right to a speedy trial.
Bail should not be granted in serious offences like rape, especially after trial commencement, despite discrepancies in the victim's statements.
The court emphasized that serious allegations, especially involving children, require careful consideration of evidence and potential risks before granting bail.
The court emphasized that consent from a minor is legally irrelevant in sexual offences, particularly in heinous cases, thus denying bail to the accused.
Discrepancies in a victim's statements do not justify bail in serious offences like rape once the trial has commenced, reflecting the need to ensure trial integrity.
The court emphasized that bail should be denied in serious offences like abetting rape, considering the gravity of the crime and potential influence on the victim.
Bail applications in serious offences require substantial change in circumstances since prior rejections, considering the nature of accusations and risk factors.
The court emphasized that in serious criminal cases, particularly involving sexual offences, the gravity of the allegations and potential witness tampering are critical factors in bail considerations....
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
