Kaushar Alam @ Kaisar vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 6253 Cal

10.12.2021 Serial no. 08 Srimanta Ct. No. 42 (Through Video Conference)

IA No.: CRAN/1/2021 in CRA No. 304 of 2021

In re : An Application for bail under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 99 of 2016 (CIS No. 99 of 2016) and Sessions Trial No. 3(6) of 2018 under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

-And-

In the matter of : Kaushar Alam @ Kaisar ... appellant.

Mr. K. Choudhury, Adv., Ms. Bushra Khatun, Adv.

... ... For the appellant.

Ms. Faria Hossain, Adv., Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, Adv.

...for the State.

This is an application for bail filed by the appellant/petitioner pending disposal of the appeal.

It is submitted by the learned advocate for the appellant that the appellant was convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a term of four years with fine and default clause for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. It is pointed out by the learned advocate for the petitioner that though the victim girl alleged that she was the victim of penetrative sexual assault, no medical examination was conducted upon her. Secondly, the witness who was cited as the only eyewitness of the occurrence did not support the prosecution case. Thirdly, the age of the victim girl was not proved. After trial, the learned Trial Judge directed the prosecution to produce the Aadhar card of the victim girl and

on the basis of the recording of age recorded in the said Aadhar card, her age was determined. Lastly, the accused was in custody for about one year and ten months. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor-in-Charge has raised objection against the prayer for bail.

I have perused the impugned judgment carefully. Though this is not the stage to point out the lacuna in the impugned judgment, it is sufficient to record that the accused suffered term imprisonment and out of the said term imprisonment, he has served a considerable period of sentence in custody. Therefore, considering the ratio laid down in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai & Ors. -Vs.- State of Gujarat reported in (1999) 4 SCC 421 and Kiran Kumar - Vs.- State of M.P. reported in (2001) 9 SCC 211, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. The petitioner may find bail of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur with further condition that he shall meet the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station once in a month and on the first date of his visit, he shall submit an affidavit stating his residential address, mobile phone number and Aadhar Card number to the Officer-in-Charge of the said police station. If the appellant violates any of such conditions, the order of bail shall be cancelled without further reference to this Court.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)