Bombay High Court denies bail to man accused of sexually assaulting minors, emphasizing the gravity of the crimes and commitment to addressing such offenses seriously.
The Bombay High Court’s denial of bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting two minor girls emphasize the gravity of such offenses. The case’s attention is heightened by the accused’s familial ties to the victims, adding complexity to the legal proceedings. This decision signals the court’s unwavering commitment to addressing sexual crimes against minors with utmost seriousness.
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/supreme-court-krishna-janmabhoomi/
Justice Prithviraj Chavan, presiding over the case, articulated a compelling reason for the denial of bail.
He stated,
“The applicant is a close relative of the victim and the family, in case of his release, it would definitely have an adverse impact upon the mind of the victims, who have already been traumatized. Even chances of influencing them cannot be ruled out.”
This statement highlighted the court’s commitment to protecting the mental well-being of the young victims, who have already endured significant trauma.
The accused, who had been arrested in 2021, faced serious allegations of rape, molestation, and sexual assault against two minor girls, aged 13 and 15. The disturbing aspect of this case is that the sexual assault reportedly began around 2016-2017. The accused’s relationship to the victims – he is their uncle, being married to their paternal aunt – was a critical factor in the court’s decision to reject his bail plea.
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/future-chief-justice-the-dazzling-legal-odyssey-of-justice-b-v-nagarathna/
In its January 23 order, the High Court also noted that the evidence did not suggest that the allegations against the accused were fabricated or false.
The Court further added,
“The applicant (accused) indeed betrayed the trust reposed in him by the victim and succeeded in executing his illegal act of molesting her which definitely constitutes offence not only under the POCSO Act but also under the provision of the IPC.”
The charges against the accused are particularly grave. He is accused of molesting one of the minors, taking nude photographs of her, and showing her pornographic videos and images. Additionally, he allegedly threatened to distribute her photographs online and is accused of administering stupefying substances before exploiting the victims.
Following a complaint by the parents in 2021, an FIR was registered under the Indian Penal Code, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), and the Information Technology Act. A special POCSO court had previously rejected the accused man’s bail application in March 2022, leading him to appeal to the High Court.
In his defense, the accused contended that a property dispute within the family was the basis for the false allegations against him. He claimed that his refusal to allow his wife to relinquish her share in some property led to sour relations and, consequently, the false case.
However, the additional public prosecutor emphasized the seriousness of the offences, noting that one of the victims had seemingly improved on her statement and that there was no medical evidence to support the allegation of penetrative sexual assault.
The counsel for the complainant strongly opposed the bail application, highlighting the breach of trust involved in the case. After considering all submissions, the Court denied the bail application but directed the special court to expedite the trial, given that the accused has been in jail since 2021.
Representing the accused were Advocates Nishad Nevgi, Gauraj Shah, Samaa Shah, and Junaid Badgujar, briefed by SN Juris. The State was represented by Additional public prosecutor AA Palkar, while Advocates Manish Singh and Archana Tiwari appeared for the complainant.
ALSO READ: https://lawchakra.in/pm-modi-supreme-court-diamond-jubilee/
This case continues to be a focal point in discussions about the legal system’s handling of sexual assault cases, especially those involving minors and family members. The Bombay High Court’s decision is a testament to the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the rights and well-being of vulnerable victims in the face of complex familial dynamics and serious allegations.
