Back
2021 Supreme(Ori) 354
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
Pama @ Pramod Dehury - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha & Anr. - Respondents
Bail Application No. 5656 of 2020, 5888 of 2020
Decided On : 01-03-2021
Amitav Tripathy, Advocate, M. Pagal, Advocate, K.C. Sahoo, Advocate, A.K. Behera, Advocate, S.S. Kanungo, Advocate
The court emphasized the need for caution in evaluating evidence, particularly in cases involving sexual assault on minors, and highlighted the gravity of the accusations and the ongoing investigation as reasons for denying bail.
Headnote:
POCSO Act - Bail Application - Sections 342, 376(AB), 376(2)(i) of I.P.C. read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail in connection with two cases under the POCSO Act, involving alleged sexual assault on minor victims. The prosecution presented specific allegations and evidence against the petitioner, including attempts to exploit multiple minor victims.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against the petitioner were specific and not of a general nature, and that they made out a prima facie case for the offences in question. The court dismissed the bail applications, emphasizing the seriousness of the accusations and the need for further investigation.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail in connection with the alleged sexual offences under the POCSO Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the specific nature of the allegations and the need for caution in evaluating the evidence, particularly in cases involving sexual assault on minors. The court also highlighted the gravity of the accusations and the ongoing investigation as reasons for denying bail.
Final Decision: The bail applications were dismissed, but the petitioner was granted the opportunity to raise the points at the time of framing of the charge.
JUDGMENT
S.K. Panigrahi, J. - "Abuse is never contained to a present moment, it lingers across a person's lifetime and has pervasive long-term ramifications" penned down by the author Lorraine Nilon who has explored plight of child sexual abuse as a matter of great concern, articulates the predicament of the matter-at-hand. A crime of such heinous intent and grave nature needs to be punished with a stringent law that comprehends the intricacies of the situation. Plethora of judgments by the Apex Court has succinctly held that the POCSO Act has been framed to protect the children from the sexual assault, harassment and exploitation, and to secure the best interest of the child. The Act recognizes the necessity of the right to privacy and confidentiality of a child to be protected and respected by every person by all means and through all stages of a judicial process involving the child.
2. Blapl No.5656 of 2020 and BLAPL No.5888 of 2020 being similar in facts, nature of offence committed and the involvement of the same person, hence both are heard analogously and taken up together for disposal by this common judgment.
3. The petitioner has filed the instant application under Section 439 of CrPC seeking bail in connection with Fatehgarh P.S. Case No.85 of 2018 corresponding to T.R. Case No.63 of 2018 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Nayagarh. The petitioner herein is the accused in connection with alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 342 and 376(AB) of I.P.C. read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
4. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 24.04.2018 at about 2.00 P.M. while the victim was moving alone in the village, the petitioner tried to lure the minor victim by directing her to bring mixture for him from the village shop. When the victim returned empty handed, the petitioner in course of conversation with her, took her inside his house and raped her by forcibly keeping her mouth shut. The victim started crying loudly, hearing which some of her sisters came and found the house locked from inside. Getting concerned about the situation, they intimated the mother of the victim. Accordingly, her mother came and knocked the door of the petitioner and called him. Hearing no response, she smashed the door clip and found her daughter in a precarious condition while the petitioner was trying to commit sexual act upon the victim. She rescued her daughter and intimated the situation to her husband (complainant).
5. The petitioner has also filed BLAPL No.5888 of 2020 under Section 439 of CrPC seeking bail in connection with Fatehgarh P.S. Case No.87 of 2018 corresponding to T.R. Case No.08 of 2019 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under POCSO Act, Nayagarh. The petitioner herein is the accused in connection with alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(i) of I.P.C. read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
6. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.04.2018 at about 9.30 A.M., the informant Bhagabat Dehury lodged a written report before the Police alleging therein that the present petitioner committed sexual intercourse with his minor daughter. It is a matter of great concern that the petitioner committed a similar act just three days prior to this incident on the another minor daughter of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant lodged the FIR for necessary legal action.
7. Heard Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned Counsel appearing for petitioner, Mr. S. S. Kanungo, learned Additional Government Advocate for prosecution and perused the case records.
8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case by the Police due to some prior grudge. Further, in absence of any cogent materials, the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against the petitioner. Further, the allegations as stated in the FIR are omnib
