IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretion of the court in granting bail, considering the severity of the offence, medical grounds, and delay in trial, while emphasizing the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the need for humane treatment of prisoners.

JUDGMENT

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C to enlarge him on bail in connection with the Special Trial (POCSO) Case No. 68 of 2020 pending on the file of the Fast Track Special Court No 1, Manipur.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 29.8.2018, the complainant, father of the victim, lodged a complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Wangoi Police Station stating that his daughter, aged 15 years, was staying at the Boarding and Coaching Centre at Samurou Awang Leikai for her preparation of HSLC Examination, 2018. The said Boarding and Coaching Centre was run by the petitioner/accused, who is also the uncle of the complainant. While the victim was staying at the said Boarding and Coaching Centre, on 13.3.2018 at about 3.30 a.m., the accused raped the victim many times by threatening her that he will make her fail the HSLC Examination. The accused also threatened the victim not to disclose the act committed by him. Based on the said complaint, the respondent police registered an FIR bearing No.43(8)2018 under Section 506 IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO Act'), upgraded to Section 6 of the said Act against the petitioner/accused.

3. Mr. L. Seityandra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime. Further, there are more than 10 female students at the boarding run by the petitioner and the students studied in group and no separate or isolated study rooms were maintained by the petitioner. In fact the house of the victim was just adjacent to the boarding and the joint family of the petitioner was also residing adjacent to the boarding. He would submit that all the female students were sleeping in the same room and the beds were joined together and it is absolutely not possible that the petitioner could enter and raped the victim many times without waking up the other female boarders.

4.Th. learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is suffering from acute Hemorrhoids and Thrombosed Perianal Varices and several other ailments and proper treatment could not be taken in the judicial custody. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been incarcerated for more than three years and the trial has not been commenced. In such circumstances, the learned counsel prayer for bail.

5. Per contra, Mr. H. Samarjit, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that on interrogation, the petitioner admitted to have committed the offence charged against him. The petitioner disclosed that he was a teacher at the Little Master English School, Samurou and also running Boarding and Coaching Centre at his house located at Samurou Awang Leikai. He further disclosed that he molested the victim girl many times inside his house which was used as a Boarding and Coaching Centre. After the petitioner sexually assaulted the victim two times, he threatened the victim not to disclose the sexual harassment and sexual assault committed by him.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that investigation completed and charge sheet dated 23.9.2018 has been filed and the case is being proceeded as Special Trial Case No.68 of 2020 before the learned Fast Track Special Court No.1, Manipur. He urged that considering the evidence gathered during the investigation, there is every likelihood of the petitioner being convicted of the offences charged against him. He further submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is likelihood of committing similar offence, as he had many negative remarks from the inhabitants of his locality. There is also likelihood of influencing prosecution witnesses and hampering the trial.

7. This Court considered the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also perused the materials available on record.

8. The ca