Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Code Read With Section 5 (M)/6 Pocso Act vs In Re:- Raja Harijan @ Raja Das @ Harijan on 13 September, 2017
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1 86 13.9.2017
C.R.M. No.9046 of 2017 p.d.
Re: An application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. affirmed on 7.9.2017 in connection with Bhadreswar Police Station Case No.202/2017 dated 10.5.2017 under Sections 376(2)(i)(j) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 5 (m)/6 POCSO Act, 2012.
- And -
In re:- Raja Harijan @ Raja Das @ Harijan .... Petitioner. Mr. Arunava Ganguly ... For the petitioner.
Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta .... For the State.
Heard the learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case diary.
The petitioner is in custody for 120 days. Charge sheet has already been submitted.
It is submitted by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the medical examination report of the victim girl does not show any external injury on her private parts. According to him, the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case.
While opposing the prayer for bail, our attention has been drawn by the learned Advocate for the State towards the statement of the victim girl, who was 13 years of age at the relevant time, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Upon consideration of such statement made by the victim girl, we are of the opinion that considering the nature of the allegation raised against the petitioner and taking into consideration the medical examination report, which though does not show any external injury on 2 the private parts of the victim girl, the same does not help the petitioner in any way.
Upon consideration of the above materials in the case diary, we are not inclined to allow the petitioner's prayer for bail.
Accordingly, such prayer is rejected and the application for bail stands dismissed.
(Debasish Kar Gupta, J.) (Amitabha Chatterjee, J. )