Ghaziabad: A special Pocso court on Friday denied bail to a man who has been in jail for nearly nine years on charges of raping a minor. It was the accused’s third bail application since his arrest on Sept 15, 2017.Additional district and sessions judge Poonam-II rejected the bail application, saying the survivor’s evidence clearly indicated the accused’s role in the crime. The court also noted the seriousness of the offence and said there was insufficient basis to release him on bail.The case dates back to Sept 6, 2017, when a 13-year-old girl and her neighbour’s daughter, also 13, were allegedly lured away and abducted by the accused, who lived in their neighbourhood. An FIR was registered at Vijaynagar police station on a complaint by the girl’s father.The case was registered under IPC sections 363, 366, 376, 328 and 120B, along with sections 3/4 and 17/18 of the POCSO Act. The provisions relate to kidnapping, abduction of a woman or girl, rape, administering a substance with intent to cause harm, criminal conspiracy and offences related to sexual assault of children and abetment, respectively.The accused’s counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated due to a grudge. He also questioned the three-day delay in registering the FIR and said there were no independent or public witnesses.The counsel further said the accused’s first bail application was rejected on Sept 26, 2019, while the second was dismissed the following day. He argued that the accused had spent nearly nine years in jail and had already served about half of the sentence that could be imposed under the charges. He also cited bail granted to two co-accused by the Allahabad High Court and the fact that the trial had remained pending since 2017.The counsel also pointed to discrepancies in the survivor’s age and the medical report, which recorded that no spermatozoa were found. It also said the investigating officer had not sent the sperm slide to the forensic laboratory.The prosecution opposed the bail application, saying the case was being heard in the court.After examining the prosecution papers and case diary, the court noted that the survivor had stated that she and the other girl were abducted at the instigation of the accused and his co-accused. She also alleged that the main accused sexually assaulted her for two days before taking her to another location, where the assault allegedly continued for four more days.The survivor, examined as a prosecution witness, told the court that she was 13 at the time of the incident and supported the allegations against the accused.The court noted that the prosecution evidence had been completed, with the remaining evidence undergoing cross-examination, and that a forensic laboratory report had been summoned from the concerned police station. “The victim’s evidence clearly demonstrates the applicant’s role in the crime,” the court said while dismissing the bail application.
