The Allahabad High Court refused bail to a man accused of raping a 4-year-old girl while observing that in our country little girls are worshipped. The Court was hearing a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application filed by the Applicant seeking enlargement on bail in a Crime case registered under Sections 363, 376, 511 IPC and Section 9M, 9U/10 POCSO Act. The bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav observed, “In our country, little girls are worshiped. Rape is a heinous crime and this type of cases are increasing day by day in our society.”
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court denied bail to an individual accused of attempting to rape a 4-year-old girl, underscoring the cultural reverence for young girls in India. The court was addressing a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application related to a case filed under Sections 363, 376, 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Sections 9M, 9U/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The bench, presided over by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, remarked-
“In our country, little girls are worshipped. Rape is a heinous crime and this type of cases are increasing day by day in our society.”
Case Overview
Advocate Mohd Aadil Siddiqui represented the appellant, while Advocate Narendra Kumar appeared for the respondent. The case presented by the prosecution details a harrowing incident. The 4-year-old daughter of the informant went outside to watch a public spectacle when locals reported seeing the child being taken away by the accused.
The informant and others soon discovered the accused with the young victim near a railway gate. She was found unconscious, with torn clothing and injuries indicating an attempted rape.
The accused fled the scene as the informant and locals approached.
Judicial Observations and Emphasis on Child Rights
The court’s remarks highlighted the gravity of the crime, stating-
“a small innocent child aged about 4 years has been tried to commit rape even who does not understand its meaning.”
Justice Yadav pointed out that such crimes are not just offenses against the individual victim but are violations against society at large and an affront to the fundamental rights of the victim, particularly the right to life as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The court underscored-
“The Court again and again observed that this type of act is not only a crime against the victim, it is a crime against the society as well and is also violative of victims most cherished of fundamental rights, mainly right to life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Justice Yadav further expressed the critical importance of timely judicial decisions in maintaining public confidence, stating-
“In such a situation, if the right decision is not taken from the Court at the right time, then the trust of a victim/common man will not be left in the judicial system.”
This statement underscores the court’s commitment to upholding justice in the face of heinous crimes.
Court’s Decision
Given the severity of the allegations and the evidence presented, the High Court chose to reject the bail application. The decision reflects a stringent stance on safeguarding the rights of victims and the larger societal fabric.
The decision by the Allahabad High Court to deny bail in the case of an attempted rape of a 4-year-old child reflects significant legal, moral, and social considerations.
The court’s ruling and observations provide insight into how the Indian judiciary addresses crimes of such magnitude and the broader implications for society.
Judicial Perspective on the Sanctity of Childhood
Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav’s remarks underscore a fundamental aspect of Indian culture, where young girls are revered and considered embodiments of purity and innocence. The statement, “In our country, little girls are worshipped,” encapsulates a societal ethos that values the protection and sanctity of children.
This culturally rooted perspective strengthens the court’s position that crimes against children are especially abhorrent and demand a stringent judicial response.
Severity of the Crime and Societal Impact
The court’s emphasis that “Rape is a heinous crime and this type of cases are increasing day by day in our society” points to the rising concern over sexual crimes, especially against minors. Such crimes are not only devastating to the victims and their families but also erode the moral and social fabric.
The observation that “a small innocent child aged about 4 years has been tried to commit rape even who does not understand its meaning” highlights the profound inhumanity of the act and the innocence lost when a child becomes a victim of such a crime.
Legal Framework and the Constitution
The decision rests on a strong interpretation of the constitutional right to life under Article 21. The statement, “The Court again and again observed that this type of act is not only a crime against the victim, it is a crime against the society as well and is also violative of victims most cherished of fundamental rights, mainly right to life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” underlines that crimes of this nature go beyond individual offenses and become violations of societal trust and fundamental rights.
By focusing on Article 21, the court is asserting that justice in such cases must prioritize the protection of basic human rights, ensuring that victims’ rights are upheld and safeguarded.
Public Trust and Judicial Accountability
Justice Yadav’s remark, “In such a situation, if the right decision is not taken from the Court at the right time, then the trust of a victim/common man will not be left in the judicial system,” addresses a critical aspect of judicial responsibility: maintaining public confidence. Trust in the judiciary is vital for a functional and fair society.
The decision to deny bail, therefore, acts as a reassurance to the public that the court is committed to handling such grave offenses with the seriousness they deserve.
Repercussions of Bail Denial
Denying bail in cases involving severe crimes like child rape serves multiple purposes. It prevents the accused from potentially tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, or evading justice.
It also sends a clear signal that the judiciary is vigilant about protecting vulnerable populations and will not hesitate to adopt a strict stance when warranted.
Legal and Social Implications
- Deterrence: The High Court’s ruling reinforces the idea that such crimes will be met with firm judicial responses, serving as a deterrent to potential offenders.
- Empowerment of Victims: By prioritizing the victim’s rights and focusing on the protection of minors, the court supports a system that emboldens victims and their families to seek justice.
- Judicial Precedent: This decision could set a precedent for how courts in India handle similar cases, leading to stricter interpretations of child protection laws and application of the POCSO Act.
The Allahabad High Court’s decision to deny bail to the accused reflects a powerful stance against crimes involving minors.
By emphasizing the constitutional right to life and the necessity of maintaining trust in the judicial system, the court has highlighted the societal obligation to protect children.
This ruling is not just about the individual case but a broader commitment to uphold justice and deter heinous crimes against vulnerable members of society.
CASE TITLE:
Ahsan v. State of UP (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:163701)
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on POCSO Act
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
