| Fast Track Court rejects bail in minor girl’s kidnapping, rape case | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Nov 12: Observing that personal liberty cannot be considered in isolation from the interests of victims and society, the Special Judge Fast Track Court (POCSO Cases), Jammu, has rejected the bail application of an accused facing trial in a minor girl's kidnapping and rape case.
Special Judge Renu Dogra Gupta dismissed the bail plea of Najrul Alam, son of Mohd Hafaz, a resident of Araria district in Bihar, in connection with FIR No. 169/2022 registered at Police Station Miran Sahib under Sections 363, 376, 342 and 109 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
According to the prosecution, the case originated from a complaint lodged on December 16, 2022, regarding the disappearance of a minor girl. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from Bihar, where she was allegedly found with the accused.
The accused, arrested on July 7, 2025, approached the court seeking bail on the grounds of false implication and alleged contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses.
Advocate Zeeshan Malik, appearing for the accused, submitted that only four prosecution witnesses had been examined and their statements contained material inconsistencies. He further argued that continued detention would amount to pre-trial punishment and violate Article 21 of the Constitution.
Opposing the application, Special Public Prosecutor Anuj Gupta, representing the UT of Jammu and Kashmir, submitted that the allegations involved heinous offences against a minor and that releasing the accused could adversely affect the ongoing trial.
After examining the record, the court observed that although bail is the rule and jail an exception, the principle must be applied while considering the gravity of the allegations, the available evidence and the interests of victims and society.
The court noted that the victim had fully supported the prosecution version in her statement recorded during the trial.
It further observed that sexual offences against minors are serious crimes that can cause lasting psychological and emotional trauma and must be dealt with utmost sensitivity.
The court held that the material available on record did not support the accused's plea of innocence at this stage and that no grounds had been established for granting bail.
Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed as devoid of merit.
The court clarified that its observations were confined to the disposal of the bail application and would not affect the merits of the main trial. (JNF) |
|
