Delhi High Court - Orders
Hukum Singh vs State on 5 April, 2021
Author: Rajnish Bhatnagar
Bench: Rajnish Bhatnagar
(VIA HYBRID HEARING)
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020
HUKUM SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Harshit Jain, Advocate.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Dr. M.P.Singh, APP for the State with
W/SI Vijeta Gautam, P.S.Punjabi
Bagh.
Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate for
complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
ORDER
% 05.04.2021
1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail in case FIR No. 155/2019 under Sections 376/201 IPC and Sections 6/21 of the POCSO Act registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh.
2. In brief, the facts of the case are that on 15.03.2019, an MLC No. 8135/2019 from Shri Balaji Action Hospital, Paschim Vihar, was received at Police Station Punjabi Bagh vide GD No. 101A, on which the prosecutrix, aged about 4 years, was found to be under treatment with alleged history of assault and child was passing blood through urine. The prosecutrix was not giving any statement and she was taken to Acharya Bhikshu Hospital, Moti Nagar, for further treatment, where the statement of the mother of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020 Page 1 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2021 17:33 prosecutrix-complainant was recorded. In her statement the complainant - mother of the prosecutrix, alleged that she lives with her son and daughter- prosecutrix, at Paschim Vihar and works in a bank from 9 A.M. to 6 P.M. Due to exams, her children were staying at her father's place at Paschim Puri. It is alleged that on the day of incident, i.e. on 15.03.2019, the complainant reached at her mother's place, at around 7:00 - 7:30 P.M. and her younger sister (aunt of prosecutrix) told complainant that the prosecutrix went to tuition at 4:00 P.M. and was brought back at around 6:30 P.M., by her tuition teacher-Komal in a towel saying that the prosecutrix passed urine at her tuition. Complainant's sister further told her that while changing the underwear of the prosecutrix, she noticed blood on them. Further, the complainant took the prosecutrix to the hospital and during treatment at Shri Balaji Action Hospital, when complainant asked the prosecutrix as to what had happened, the prosuctrix told her that the father of the tuition teacher touched her vagina, in their bathroom. On this statement of the complainant, case under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act was registered.
3. During investigation, statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix and all the main witnesses, including her mother, brother, aunt and maternal grandfather, were recorded in the Court. Consequent thereto, Section 201 IPC, Section 88 of the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 21 of the POCSO Act were added in this case.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.03.2019. It is further submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he used to work in the factory and used to be at his workplace at the time when the victim used to come to his house for taking tuitions. It is further submitted that victim has been Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020 Page 2 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2021 17:33 examined in the Court and she has failed to identify the petitioner as a perpetrator of the alleged crime. It is further submitted that there are contradictions between the testimony of the witness and her mother. It is further submitted that the doctor who had made observations in the MLC has not been examined. He submitted that the testimony of the victim, which has been recorded in the Trial Court, does not inspire confidence and she has not uttered a single word against the petitioner. He submitted that as per the MLC there was no external injury which categorically shows that no offence was committed by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the mother of the victim has been examined as PW2 and she has not made any complaint to the police at the first instance, rather, on the observations of the doctor of Shri Balaji Action Hospital, present FIR has been registered.
5. On the other hand, it is submitted by learned APP for the State that the allegations against the petitioner are very grave and serious in nature. He further submits that the victim at the time of incident was only a four years old child who used to go to take tuitions at the house of the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is more than fifty years of age and without any regard to the age of the victim, he committed the crime. It is submitted that the victim and her mother have supported the case of the prosecution and detailed analysis of their testimonies cannot be done at the stage of seeking bail. He submitted that as per the biological examination, blood stains were found on the underwear of the victim. He further submitted that PW3 Doctor Ashish Kumar Singh, CMO of Shri Balaji Action Hospital, who had firstly examined the child victim categorically deposed in the MLC that when the child was brought to the hospital she was complaining of passing of blood through urine and pain in abdomen and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020 Page 3 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2021 17:33 micturation, which fact is also recorded in the MLC. It is further submitted by learned APP that looking into the condition of the victim, doctor referred her to gynaecology department.
6. In the present case, the victim who is around four years of age used to go to take tuitions at the house of the petitioner. The victim has been examined in the Court and we must not forget that at the time of cross- examination she was only four years of age and her testimony is to be read keeping in mind the mindset of a child and her age at the time of recording of her statement in Court.
7. I have gone through the statement of the victim recorded in the Court and mother of the victim - complainant, who has been examined as PW-2. As far as identification of the petitioner is concerned, the victim mentioned in the statement that the petitioner is "didi ke papa", and this terminology has been used by the victim time and again in her deposition in the Court. So what effect it is to make to the case of the petitioner is not being discussed by me at this stage in detail. The doctor has categorically stated that the victim was bleeding when she was brought to the hospital and was then referred to gynaecology. The biological examination of the victim also reveals that blood was detected on exhibits 1a and 1b, which are the undergarments of the victim. As far as the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a mention in the MLC of the victim that no external injury was found, simply because such a finding has been recorded in the MLC, in my opinion, it is of no help to the petitioner at this stage.
8. At this stage, I am not examining threadbare the testimony of the victim and the mother of the victim/complainant, who has been examined as PW2, otherwise it may prejudice the case of either of the parties. Looking Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020 Page 4 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2021 17:33 into the medical evidence on record, statement of PW-3 Dr. Ashish Kumar Singh, allegations being grave and serious in nature, and the victim involved in the case is four years old who goes to the house of the petitioner for taking tuitions, during that time the alleged incident took place, no ground for grant of bail is made out.
9. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J APRIL 5, 2021 AK Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA BAIL APPLN. 1891/2020 Page 5 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2021 17:33