New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to an accused facing allegations of molestation and misbehaviour of a minor girl under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
A bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Roy took note of the fact that the accused has cooperated with the investigation and the charge sheet in the case is yet to be filed.
Asking the accused to further cooperate with the investigation, the Bench, also comprising Justice SVN Bhatti, said that in the event of arrest, he will be allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 20,000 to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer.
“As the prosecutrix is a neighbour of the petitioner, the petitioner must maintain physical as well as virtual distance from the prosecutrix and other witnesses in the case,” it added.
Disposing of the accused’s special leave petition, the apex court granted liberty to Rajasthan Police and the informant to move for cancellation of bail, if any violation of this condition is brought to the notice of the trial court.
The accused, represented by criminal lawyer Namit Saxena, moved the apex court seeking pre-arrest bail which was declined by the Rajasthan High Court. The case was registered at Gadhmora police station in Karauli for offences under Sections 354(A) 354(B), 504 of the IPC read with Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act against the petitioner.
According to the FIR, when the complainant had visited the accused’s house to charge her phone, he allegedly molested and misbehaved with her.
Advocate Saxena contended the prosecutrix’s family, motivated by animosity, fabricated a false story and used the prosecutrix to falsely implicate the accused with the intent of putting him in jail.
“The case against the petitioner is completely false and therefore despite investigating for almost two years, nothing has been found against him at all. That there is no evidence on record, nor has any legitimate proof been given by the prosecutrix to substantiate her allegations. That many family members of petitioner’s family were present in the house at the time of the alleged incident, it is highly unlikely that the events occurred as described in the FIR,” said the petition.
(IANS)
