Munmun Kaur
Published On: February 24, 2022 at 12:56 IST
The Supreme Court on Monday observed that once prima facie it appears that the Prosecutrix was a minor, the grounds like that there was a ‘love affair’ between her and the Accused and there was alleged ‘refusal to marry’ will have no bearing on the grant of Bail in POCSO Case.
The observation was made a Bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant in the Case of X (Minor) V. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr. while hearing an Appeal against the Single Judge of the High Court of Jharkhand wherein the High Court granted Bail to the second Respondent/Accused subject to some conditions.
The Apex Court observed that the High Court was manifestly in error in allowing the Bail Application.
The Bench observed that the reasons that weighed with the High Court were from the statement under Section 164 and the averments in the FIR that there was a love affair between the Appellant and the second Respondent and that the Case was instituted on the refusal of the second Respondent to marry the Appellant. The Apex Court opined that the said grounds were specious.
Advocate Rajesh Ranjan appearing for the Accused contended that he is a student studying in an engineering college and he will not get Bail throughout the Trial. To which the Bench said that in the facts and circumstances, the Special Judge, POCSO, who is in charge of the Trial shall complete the Trial within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the Supreme Court’s Order.
The Bench while setting aside the impugned Bail Order said, “Having regard to the age of the Prosecutrix and the nature and gravity of the Crime, no case for the grant of Bail was established”.