Srinagar: The Fast Track court here on Wednesday rejected the bail application of a rape accused facing a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) case.
Presiding Officer Fast Track Court POCSO cases, Aarti Mohan, rejected the bail application of Amit Ambardar, son of Behari Lal Ambardar of Janipur Jammu, who is facing charges of having raped the minor daughter of a daily-wager at Nowshara Srinagar in 2022.
As per the police report, on 31-03-2022, the complainant — a resident of Baramulla, who was then putting up in a rented house at Nowshera – alleged that the accused Amit Ambardar, also residing in the ground floor of the same house, had called his two minor daughters to his room. He had then given some money to the younger girl and sent her outside for purchasing some sweets, attempted to rape her second daughter, read the complaint.
A case under sections 376-AB IPC (rape) and section 7/8 of POCSO Act was registered. During the investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded under section 164 of CrPc and her medical examination was also conducted.
After the completion of the investigation, the offences under section 376-AB IPC and 7/8 of POCSO Act were established against the accused and a chargesheet was presented against him on May 27, 2022.
The accused denied the charges, and accordingly, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence in support of its case.
The accused through his counsel in the bail application submitted that the statement of the victim alone does not connect the accused with the commission of offence.
“If the story put forth by the victim before the court is assumed to be true, but her statement dents substantially after the examination of parents of the victim who have contradicted the statement of prosecutrix in material particulars rendering the recorded testimony of prosecutrix unreliable and unworthy of credence.”
The parents gave entirely a different version and their testimony cannot be disbelieved at this stage for the consideration of the bail application, he argued in the court.
Judge Aarti Mohan while disposing of the bail application said the accused has been charged for the commission of an offence under Section 9/10 of the POCSO Act. As such the presumption under Section 29 of the Act would stand triggered against him.
“As far as the statement of the victim is concerned, she has supported her earlier statement recorded under section 164 CrPc and despite vigorous cross-examination, the accused has not been able to dislodge the presumption which has arisen against him,” the judge observed.
No doubt the other two witnesses (the father and mother of the victim) have turned hostile; however, considering the statement given by the minor victim, the accused has not been able to derive much benefit from the statements of the parents.
“Without commenting much upon the evidence led so far it would be sufficient to say that the presumption against the accused stands strong like a rock and has not been dislodged,” said the court.
The judge continued “it is settled law that the solitary testimony of the victim is sufficient if the same is found to be credible and no corroboration of the same is required.”
