Bitul Mohan @ Singh vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 2887 Gua

                                                                             Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010128082021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                        Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/366/2021 in Crl.A./150/2021

            BITUL MOHAN @ SINGH
            S/O- SRI TARAN MOHAN, VILL.- KHARANGI GAON, P.O. AND P.S.
            HALWATING SIVSAGAR, DIST.- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
            REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR B KHAKHLARY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                    BEFORE
                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH
                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

                                            ORDER

10.08.2022 [N. Kotiswar Singh, J.]

Heard Mr. B. Khakhlary, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

Page No.# 2/3

The present application has been filed for granting bail in respect of accused applicant,

who is at present in jail pursuant to the judgment and order dated 19.04.2021 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Sivasagar, in Special POCSO Case

No.17/2016 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

It has been submitted that serious doubts have arisen on the prosecution case in as

much as, firstly, it has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix is a

minor. Secondly, there is no eye-witness. In fact, it is a case where the allegation of rape has

been falsely alleged against the applicant as a case of "revenge rape" in as much as the elder

brother of the prosecutrix was convicted for cutting the right hand from the wrist of the

applicant and as such, it has been submitted that in order to take revenge for conviction of

her own brother she had made the false allegation.

As regards the minority, what we have noted is that the date of birth of the prosecutrix

has been shown as 16.02.1998 as per the Admit Card issued by the Board of Secondary

Education, Assam. Though the doctor who examined her, stated that the prosecutrix is aged

above 18 years at the time of examination, the examination was done after about 7 months

of the incident. Thus, it does not conclusively establish that the prosecutrix was not a minor

which of course as a tentative view can be finally examined at the time of final hearing.

The applicant also admitted in his statement made under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that the

prosecutrix used to visit his house and it is a case of the prosecution that the prosecutrix

used to visit the applicant's house on being called by his wife who also happens to be her

own sister to help her in the household chores.

Under the circumstances, we are of the view that while the matter deserves further Page No.# 3/3

scrutiny of this Court, we are not inclined at this stage to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the present application praying for grant of bail to the applicant is declined.

          Sd/- Arun Dev Choudhury                    Sd/- N. Kotiswar Singh
                   JUDGE                                      JUDGE




Comparing Assistant