IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of sexual intent for the offence of sexual harassment under the POCSO Act, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and the need for a humane attitude in dealing with bail applications.

JUDGMENT

This application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with FIR No.24(4)2021 of Moreh Police Station registered under Section 11(iv)(v)/18 of POCSO Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.4.2021 at 9.00 a.m., the complainant Harbajan Kaur lodged a written complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of Moreh Police Station stating that on 5.4.2021, her daughter was mentally harassed by the petitioner with sexual intention and asked her to send pictures late at night through mobile phone. The petitioner also blackmailed the daughter of the complainant and asked her to meet privately, failing which he would come to her residence and expose her relation with her boyfriend. Further case of the prosecution is that the petitioner came to the house of the complainant thrice on 5.4.2021, 6.4.2021 and 14.4.2021 asking why her daughter blocked his number. While visiting the house of the victim, the petitioner also threatened the victim regarding her education, as she is one of the sponsored students under VSR Trust Foundation and further threatened to discontinue her sponsorship.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that the petitioner was working as Headmaster in Sun Rise School, Moreh and he had never been complained of by his students or parents on his morality and character or any other virtues till now. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a responsible family man having wife and two sons, who are dependent on his earning and having deep root and living in the society with good reputation and dignity without any complaint. However, the petitioner was arrested on 17.4.2021 based on the false complaint lodged by the complainant.

4. The learned counsel next submitted that since the daughter of the complainant was very weak in her education and due to that reason the petitioner had been very strict on her and some time he even scolded her to study hard to become a good student being a teacher and Headmaster of the school. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner even said to the daughter of the complainant not to mingle and associate with bad company and loiter around here and there without any reason and focus on study only which she hardly gave ear to the petitioner’s words and that on one occasion, the petitioner caught red handed the daughter of the complainant associating with bad company.

5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner went to the house of the victim three times only because for the welfare and well-being of the victim’s academic career and not otherwise, but he did not enter inside the house. In fact, the petitioner, at no point of time used any sexual, demeaning or vulgar words or gesture or comment towards his students, including the victim, while chatting either through voice or typing mode and these chats were strictly restricted within the perimeter of student and teacher relationship.

6. By placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala v. Raneef, reported in (2011) 1 SCC 784, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial will take several years and the said factor has to be taken into consideration.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that earlier the petitioner approached the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Imphal West for bail and by the order dated 20.5.2021, the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed. Since the petitioner was in custody from 17.4.2021, the further detention of the petitioner under judicial custody even after the completion of the investigation is not required and moreover, the reputation of the petitioner will be tarnished irreparably in society. Arguing so, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks bail to the petitioner.

8. Opposing the bail appli