Cannot hold roving enquiry to grant bail, says HC

Rejecting anticipatory bail petitions moved by the victim’s aunt (mother’s sister-in-law), the aunt’s brother and the man friend, Justice M Dhandapani said, “Gone are the days when the children could be safely left at the hands of relatives for fear of outsiders causing harm to them. The psychological abuse caused by such persons is amply evident from the statement of the victim.”

Setting aside the petitioners’ assertion that the complaint was only in retaliation to a complaint earlier lodged against the victim’s maternal uncle accusing him of offences under Pocso Act, the court held, “No mother would put her daughter in a jeopardizing situation, that too under the garb of sexual abuse, merely to save her brother from a criminal action instituted against him.”

Justice Dhandapani pointed out that the court was only tasked with examining whether there was prima facie case or not, and not to conduct a roving enquiry as to the availability of the petitioners at the place of occurrence at the relevant point of time.

“Without proper investigation, which is at the threshold, leaving the petitioners out on bail would not be conducive to the conduct of investigation and also to the safety and security of the defacto complainant and the victim,” the court held.

“When the victim had categorically pointed a finger on the petitioners to the effect that they had threatened the victim with dire consequences if she divulges their evil acts, enlarging the petitioners on bail would be detrimental to the investigative process,” the judge added.

The case involved allegations that the victim was shown obscene videos and photos by her aunt’s brother and that she had been groped, pushed into a bedroom and manhandled by the aunt’s brother and his friend. The alleged incidents took place on various days and the victim initially failed to disclose it to the family following threats by the accused, including her aunt.