Leniency In Matters Involving Unnatural Offences Not Only Undesirable, But Also Against Public Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Dismissing a bail application of a person in a case under Section 377, 506 IPC and Sections 4 & 5 of POCSO Act, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed that leniency in matters involving unnatural offences is not only undesirable, but also against public interest. Such types of offences are to be dealt with severity and with iron hands and leniency in such matters would be really a case of misplaced sympathy, said the court.A bench comprising Justice Mohan Lal was hearing a plea for bail, moved on the ground that the petitioner being a young boy of 21 years of age, belonging to respectable family and after passing 12th standard in 2020 was about to join college for pursuing higher studies, but got involved in "false and frivolous" FIR which later on culminated into production of challan which is pending trial in the court of Special Judge POCSO Cases Jammu. The court was told accused has been in jail since March 30, 2022.The petitioner contended that trial court below while rejecting his bail application had not considered crucial aspect of the matter that except allegations, there was no documentary proof or otherwise which even remotely suggests the involvement of petitioner in the commission of offences attributed to him. Furthermore the trial court has not even considered the medical report forming part of the charge sheet which clearly negates the stand of victim that unnatural offence has been committed against him, it was argued. While perusing the FIR, the bench noted that on 30-03-2022, the victim — a child of 11 years of age, had gone to the house of accused for getting milk, but the accused committed unnatural offence with the child. Therefore, there is a prima-faice or reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed the offence of rape upon the victim, the court said. The court said that the lustful designs of the accused crossed all borders of indecency as he committed penetrative sexual assault upon minor victim unmindful of the shattering mental trauma the later suffered."Enlargement of the petitioner/accused on bail in the case in hand at this stage when the trial is yet incomplete and even the statement of victim child is yet to be recorded, is sure to shake the confidence of the people at large whose interests are involved in the case," the bench observed. The court noted the statement of victim child is yet to be recorded before the trial court and the doctor who has conducted the medical examination of the victim child is also yet to be examined.If accused is enlarged at the stage of trial, there is every likelihood or reasonable apprehension that he may influence/win over/threaten the victim of the crime and material witnesses, therefore, temper the prosecution evidence, the court saidObserving that courts cannot lose sight of the fact that crime of violence against minor children are on increase, the bench said it is a fittest case, where bail ought not be granted at this stage.Case Title: Rahul Kumar Vs UT of J&K Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 146Click Here To Read/Download Judgement

Leniency In Matters Involving Unnatural Offences Not Only Undesirable, But Also Against Public Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Basit Amin Makhdoomi

Tags