news details |
|
|
| HC reject pre-bail of father-in-law & ors in rape case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, July 22: Justice Mohammad Akram Chowdhary rejected the pre-arrest bail applications of Youans Ali Father-in-law, Nishad Ali (husband) and Rufana Bibi Mother-in-law in alleged rape case.
As per complaint lodged by complainant, she and her husband Naushad Ali got married in the year 2018 according to Muslim rites and rituals and the complainant has started residing in the matrimonial house. After solemnization of marriage, the complainant found that her husband was not having any source of income and was fully dependent upon the income of his father, therefore, the father-in-law of the complainant had kept his dominance in the family. After marriage, the complainant led a happy matrimonial life with her husband for few days but thereafter the complainant was forced by her father-in-law to do domestic work for whole day and when the complainant objected the same, her husband asked to obey the command of his father being head of the family but the fact remains that her father-in-law was having evil eyes upon her from the day of the solemnization of her marriage and he had forced the complainant to work for whole day only to yield pressure upon her so that she may agree for sexual favour. The father-in-law of the complainant by taking the advantage of absence of other family members tried to molest the complainant day in and day out. After the incident of molestation and demand of sexual favour, the complainant narrated the same to her husband and mother-in-law but it made no difference. On 23.05.2023 in the morning at about 9.30 am, the husband of the complainant left the house for selling the milk whereas, mother-in-law of the complainant had left the house to graze the cattle and by taking the advantage of absence of other family members in the house, the father-in-law of the complainant manhandled the complainant and forcibly committed sexual intercourse against her wishes and without her consent. He threatened the complainant that in case the incident of forcible sexual intercourse/rape is disclosed to anybody, he would kill her.
High Court after hearing both the sides observed that it is trite that the offence under Section 376 IPC is a heinous crime, which cannot be viewed with leniency. Sexual assault not only causes physical injuries but leaves a scar on the most cherished dignity, honour, reputation and chastity of a woman, therefore, needs to be dealt with utmost sensitivity.
The Investigating Officer in the matter, who was present in the Court during hearing, submitted that investigation of the case is complete and it has been concluded that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are proved and that the Investigating Authority is ready to file challan under Section 173 CrPC before the competent court of law against the petitioners.
Having regard to the factual background of the complaint, gravity of the offences alleged to have been committed by the applicants against the non-application No.3, investigation having been concluded and the charge-sheet ready to be laid before the court of law, the application for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest, moved by the applicants, have no merit. Needless to say that the trial court, in view of availability of charge-sheet and other material, collected by the investigating agency during investigation, shall be in a better position to consider the plea, if raised, for grant of bail, at the time when charge-sheet is laid. As a result, the instant application for grant of bail, is dismissed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
