Court rejects bail in POSCO ACT

20/10/2018

JAMMU, OCT 19: Prin cipal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul rejected the bail application of Durga Krishan who was allegedly involved in POSCO.
According to the police case that The allegations against the accused are that on 26.08.2018 at 19.45 PM the complainant along with his daughters aged 07 years had gone to the market for goods and while coming back met accused at Migrant Colony Nagrota. Accused took Bomika Pandita daughter of complainant in his lap and within ¾ minutes she started crying. The accused tried to keep her silent by offering toffee to her and on asking of complainant the accused put down the daughter of the complainant and fled away. Thereafter the daughter of the complainant told that the accused put his hand in her private part and pressed her 2/3 times.. Having received the report, the police concerned registered a case FIR No: 203/2018 against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under sections 376 AB RPC & 6 POCSVO 2018 and initiated the investigation.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul after hearing both the sides observed that accused faces such allegations and charge which would evoke social disgust and social censure of the act imputed to him. Such an act has been found to provoke public anger, outbursts and condemnation. Such an act has been found to provoke people to violence if the situation is not properly and effectively handled and dealt with. In such cases, the exercise of discretion vested in the courts cannot be exercised in favour of the accused as a matter of course and he cannot be granted bail without their being extraordinary circumstances in his favour. In such cases, the exercise of discretion becomes an obligation which cannot be discharged in a cavalier or arbitrary manner. The judicial discretion vested in the courts is in the nature of a solemn duty entrusted to it by the society. The act which is alleged of having been committed by the accused is a heinous offence having provoked social condemnation and social disgust. This Court cannot ignore at this stage the public anger and condemnation that he act of the accused has provoked. Admitting the accused to bail at this stage of the case would add to, and aggravate, that anger and condemnation and may cause people lose faith in the administration of criminal justice. The trust and confidence which people repose in the courts cannot be betrayed. The distinction with our Judiciary is that it has lived up to the expectations of the people and held aloft the banner of justice. It has neither succumbed to undue public pressure nor shown liberality or tolerance when dealing with the perpetrators of heinous crimes. It has dealt with every matter on the pedestal of justice and objectivity, giving consideration to every genuine public sentiment and public interest. Considering the present bail matter on the pedestal of justice and objectivity, this court does not find any merit in it. The accused cannot be granted bail at this stage of the case.
The other reason which persuades this court to reject this bail petition is to prevent the accused from absconding and tampering with the prosecution evidence. The gravity of the offence and the severity of the punishment which it would carry on conviction is an aspect that may induce the accused to abscond and avoid justice or tamper with, and manipulate the prosecution evidence. Though there is no certainty that the accused, if released on bail, would abscond and tamper with the prosecution evidence yet the chances of him manipulating and tampering with the prosecution evidence in the face of serious accusation of aggravated sexual assault cannot be ruled out.
With these observations Court rejected the bail application. JNF

Share This Story


Comment On This Story

 

Photo Gallery

  
BSE Sensex
NSE Nifty