HC grants bail to Accused under POCSO Act on Medical Ground, before Witness' Statements were recorded (Read Order)

The Delhi High Court granted interim bail to a person accused under the POCSO Act even before the statements of the witness were recorded in the wake of COVID-19.

Factual Background 

The accused was undergoing a trial for the offences committed under 376/506 IPC and section 6 of POCSO Act and the present application was moved by the Applicant for interim bail on medical ground.

Case of the Applicant

The Counsel for the Applicant contended that the medical status report of the Applicant furnished by the jail authorities confirms that the he is a patient of Asthma and has regular complaints regarding this. In addition to this, the inmates and the officials in the barrack have found to be COVID positive. The Counsel further termed the Respondent’s claim regarding potential threat to him/her on release of the Applicant as baseless, on the ground that there is a deviation in the prosecutrix’s mother’s statement and the complaint, which reflects on the irregularities in the Respondent’s Case. She also contended that the police have also found no substance in the allegations made by the Respondent. 

Case of the Respondent (herein)

The Counsel for the Respondent/ Complainant stated that there is risk of threats and intimidation by the Applicant since he resides in the same area as the prosecutrix and as per the recommendation of the Committee of the Delhi High Court, under trials facing charges under sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO act should not be granted interim bail. In response to this, the Applicant showed his willingness to file an undertaking that if granted bail, the he will not visit the locality where the prosecutrix resides and will make arrangements to reside at far of place.

Decision of the Court

Considering the above circumstances and the medical condition of the Applicant, the court granted an interim bail to him for a period of 45 days subject to his furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 and his declaration that he would not leave the National Capital Region and reside far from the place of residence of prosecutrix and her immediate family. He was also asked by the Court to furnish the complete address of such place, to jail superintendent at the time of release.
Further the Court barred the Applicant from contacting or visiting any of the prosecution witness and from tempering with the evidence.

Case Details

Before: Delhi High Court

Bench: Hon’ble Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani

Parties to the Matter: Arvind Kumar v. State

Case No: FIR No. 115 of 2018

Counsel for the Applicant: Adv. Anushree Kapadia

Counsel for the Respondent: Adv. Supriya Juneja

Read Order @LatestLaws.com