In cases involving POCSO offences, the court may grant bail if the prosecution's case is weak or if there are other compelling circumstances.

Headnote:
BAIL - POCSO ACT - SECTION 439 CRPC - REPEAT BAIL APPLICATION - DNA REPORT INCONCLUSIVE - STATEMENTS OF PROSECUTION WITNESSES NOT SUPPORTING PROSECUTION STORY - BAIL GRANTED
Fact of the Case:

The applicant was arrested and charged with offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 3/4, (2) & 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. He filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, which was dismissed on merits. He then filed a repeat bail application.
Finding of the Court:

The court noted that the statements of the prosecutrix, her mother, and her father did not support the prosecution story. The DNA report was also inconclusive. Considering these factors, the court allowed the repeat bail application.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the statements of prosecution witnesses and the inconclusive DNA report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the statements of the prosecution witnesses and the inconclusive DNA report weakened the prosecution's case. The court also considered the fact that the applicant had been in judicial custody since 25.06.2023 and that the trial would take considerable time to conclude.
Final Decision: The court allowed the repeat bail application and directed the applicant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and a solvent surety.

ORDER

This is second bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of bail relating to FIR/Crime No.583/2023 dated 22.06.2023 registered at Police Station Dindori, District Dindori (M.P.), for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 3/4, (2) & 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. His first application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.12.2023 passed in MCrC No.49234/2023. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The applicant is in judicial custody since 25.06.2023 and the trial will take considerable time to conclude. The applicant is a permanent resident of district and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to furnish surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions imposed upon him by the court. Upon these circumstances, the applicant may be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

This repeat bail application has been argued on the ground that the statements of prosecutrix (PW3), her mother (PW2) and father (PW1) have been recorded, in which they have not supported the prosecution story. The State counsel was directed to submit the DNA report in the case, which has been received on Whatsapp of State counsel and its copy is enclosed with the case diary. The said DNA report is inconclusive for the reason that the DNA profile obtained from the source of prosecutrix was uninterpretable.

Having considered the statements of material witnesses given on oath, the DNA report and also the MLC report of prosecutrix, this repeat bail application is allowed.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of the trial.

It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, this M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of. (ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE JUDGE rv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document