A bail application may be denied when serious allegations against a minor are substantiated, emphasizing the gravity of the crime and potential risks of absconding.

ORDER

1. On 16.05.2022, an FIR was lodged before the Officer-In-Charge Nongkhyllam Police Station, South West Khasi Hills informing the police that the minor daughter of the informant on the previous day i.e on 15.05.2022 at around 5:00 PM, as she was going to the river to draw water, on the way she was accosted by two persons one of whom forcefully raped her and the other thereafter attempted to rape her but could not succeed, hence the said report.

2. On receipt of the said FIR, a case being Mawkyrwat Women PS Case No. 8(05)22 under Section 3 (a)/4 POCSO Act r/w Section 3 07 IPC was registered and investigation was launched.

3. In course of investigation, one of the accused Shri Borson Nongbri was arrested and is now still in judicial custody. The other accused is said to have absconded and could not be apprehended till date.

4. The Investigating Officer (I/O) had caused medical examination to be conducted on the person of the alleged victim girl and has also recorded the statement of the relevant witnesses in the case. At the conclusion of the investigation, the I/O taking into account the statement, particularly of the alleged victim girl under Section 161 as well as under Section 164 Cr.PC, has come to a finding that a prima facie case against the accused under Section 3 (a) and 4 of the POCSO Act has been found well established and the accused person is sent up before the court to stand trial.

5. The accused person Shri Borson Nongbri has preferred bail applications before the Trial Court but the same was rejected and consequently, by this instant application under Section 439 Cr.PC, has approached this Court with a prayer for grant of bail. This application has been filed by the petitioner who is the father of the accused.

6. Heard Mr. T.L. Jyrwa, learned counsel for the petitioner who has submitted that since the charge sheet was filed by the I/O therefore, the process of investigation is completed and there is no scope for the accused to tamper with the evidence or witnesses, if released on bail.

7. The learned counsel has further submitted that records would show that the alleged victim girl has made contradictory statements in her deposition under Section 161 as well as under Section 164 Cr.PC which are not consistent with whatever she has stated before the Medical Officer who had recorded her statement four hours after the FIR has been filed and who has conducted her medical examination.

8. The story narrated by the alleged victim girl does not evoke any confidence inasmuch as, that at one place she has stated that the accused had forcefully dragged her to the jungle at the place of occurrence and after raping her, he tried to hit her head with a beer bottle but fortunately she managed to escape and ran away. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.PC she has stated that while she was fetching water and returning back home, two men approached her and one of them with a tattoo in his neck proposed to her to be his girlfriend to which she refused. It was thereafter that he grabbed her and pulled her towards the jungle where he forcibly raped her. After he had raped her, he ran away and the other person also approached her to have sex with him but on being refused, he too ran away. It was then that the alleged victim girl ran towards a nearby house and called her sister on the phone where she narrated the incident. This inc