critical role of thorough judicial scrutiny in granting bail applications in sensitive cases

Criminal Sexual Harrsament

Posted by: Aditya Pratap Law Offices on 2024-07-18

---

The case related to the grant of Bail Application to the accused under Section 439 (any person accused of an offense and in custody be released on bail) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1908 in which the Hon’ble Court granted bail where the accused is charged with some serious offenses punishable under section 439 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 8 and Section 12 (punishment for sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

The case raises significant questions about the application of law and the principle of governing bail. This article goes into the details of the cases, the arguments presented by both of the parties, and the decision given by the court after considering all the given facts.

The Allegations:

 The Accused is charged with sexual offenses involving the victim who is a house help in his friend’s house. According to the facts given by the prosecution, the accused touched the fingers of the victim while she was giving him a glass of water because of that she was frightened and ran away to the kitchen. After this, she narrated this incident to her two friends who took them to the nearest Police Station and filed a complaint against the accused.

Defense Arguments:

The defense argued that the case lacked a prima facie case of sexual harassment or outraging modesty. They contended that the touch was not meant to harass someone but it was just inadvertent and lacked sexual intent. 

They further emphasized that the accused is a permanent resident, is married, has two children and has no previous criminal records, and poses no threat either to the victim or to the witnesses. They also assured the court that the accused would cooperate with the investigation process and would comply with all the bail conditions.

Prosecution’s Stand:

The prosecution argued that the victim’s reaction specified that the touch was made with the intent of sexual assault. Thus, they opposed the granting of bail to the accused as they believed that he may threaten the witnesses and not remain present during the trial.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

The court, after hearing both parties and considering all the facts and evidence presented, noted that the accused has roots in society and has no criminal records and there is no substantial risk of tampering with the evidence by him. Thus, the court found it appropriate to grant him bail under specific conditions that have to be fulfilled by the accused to ensure justice and prevent any interference in the ongoing investigation.

The Court put the following conditions with the bail:

1. The accused has to generate a bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of the same.

2. The accused must not contact or try to contact directly or indirectly with the victim in any case.

3. The accused is prohibited from tampering with the evidence and must not pressure the witnesses in any way.

4. The accused must submit copies of all his documents, Aadhar Card, proof of residential address, and details of two blood relatives.

5. The accused is restricted from leaving India without the permission of the Court.

6. The accused must not be involved in any similar kind of offenses and also if there is any kind of change in his permanent or temporary address he will have to inform the court.  

Thus, bail is granted to the accused safeguarding the rights of the accused and ensuring that no injustice will be done with any party. 

The case is the best example where the Judiciary maintained the balance between the accused’s rights and the integrity of the judicial process. These types of cases which contain so much sensitivity involving sexual offenses need to be dealt with so much consciousness ensuring that the victim does not have any kind of threat in any case. It highlights the critical role of thorough judicial scrutiny in bail applications, especially in sensitive cases.