Gauhati High Court
Rakesh Kalita vs The State Of Assam on 1 October, 2020
Author: Rumi Kumari Phukan
Bench: Rumi Kumari Phukan
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010111632020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 2095/2020
1:RAKESH KALITA
S/O MANORANJAN KALITA, VILL-BARBANG (CHOUKHUTI), P.S.-
PATACHARKUCHI, DIST-BARPETA, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 01-10-2020 By this application under Section 438 CrPC, petitioner, namely, Rakesh Kalita, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Patacharkuchi Police Station Case No. 267/2020 registered under Sections 420/376(3)/294/384 of the IPC, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 67 of the IT (Amendment) Act, 2008.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the sides and perused the Case Diary produced before me.
The allegation in the FIR against the accused petitioner is that the accused petitioner had committed rape on the informant/victim girl and had captured obscene photos and video recording on Page No.# 2/2 his mobile phone and later on uploaded the said video recording and photographs in social media (Whatsapp).
The statement of the victim girl reveals that she had love affairs with the accused petitioner since her childhood and also had physical relationship with the accused petitioner without any inducement by the accused petitioner. Now her marriage is fixed with another boy and the victim girl is intending to give up the relationship with the accused petitioner, but the accused petitioner is not agreeable, has uploaded the obscene photos and video in Whatsapp, which is detrimental to her future life.
From the materials on record it appears that after continuing love affairs and physical relationship with the accused petitioner stealthily for years together, now the informant has come up with the story against the accused petitioner. Furthermore, no such obscene photograph or video recording has been produced before this Court, which is alleged to have been uploaded in social media/Whatsapp etc. Considering the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the opinion that custodial detention of the accused person is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Accordingly, the order dated 31.08.2020, granting interim pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner is hereby made absolute.
Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.
Return the Case Diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant