Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2026:JKLHC-JMU:446

03. Accused Suman Devi, Nisha Devi and Joginder Singh were bailed out U/Ss 363/366/120-B/212 IPC, during further investigation, statement of other witnesses u/s 161 and 164 CrPC were recorded and offence under Sections 3/4/17 POCSO Act were added, on 11.07.2024, accused Swaran Singh was arrested, IO re-arrested accused Nisha Devi, Suman Devi and Joginder Singh u/s 17 POCSO Act, and concluded the investigation and offences U/Ss 363/366/120-B/212 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act were proved against the accused Sumit Kumar @ Manish and offences u/s 363/366/120-B/212 IPC 17 POCSO Act were proved against the co-accused including the applicants; that the accused moved trial court seeking release on bail, who vide its order dated 04.03.2025 enlarged the accused-Suman Devi and Nisha Devi on bail, however, the bail application moved by the applicants herein, Joginder Singh and Swaran Singh was rejected. Aggrieved of rejection of their bail plea by the trial court, the applicants have approached this court by way of filing the instant bail application.

07. Mr. Bharti, learned State counsel, ex adverso, vehemently argued that the applicants do not deserve the concession of bail and out of 28 Prosecution Witnesses, as many as 14 PWs have already been examined and the trial is 2026:JKLHC-JMU:446 running at phenomenal pace; that the applicants are involved in heinous and non bailable offences; that the offences of which the applicants are charged are, punishable, which carries punishment of imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years under Section 363 IPC, for offence U/S 366 IPC, punishment with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and for offence U/S 17 POCSO, for abetment in committing the offences U/Ss 3 & 4 of POCSO, carries punishment with imprisonment for a term of not less than 7 years but may extend to imprisonment for life, thus attracts the rigors of Section 437 CrPC hence the applicants cannot be admitted to bail. He further argued that, the applicants, at the most, may pray for direction to the trial court for timely conclusion of trial. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application be out-rightly rejected.

(viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. (See: Ram Govind Upadhyay Vs. Sudarshan Singh & Ors. reported in (2002) 3 SCC 598 ).

11. The offence of which the applicants are charged is, punishable under Section 363 IPC, which carries punishment of imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, for offence U/S 366 IPC, punishment with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and for offence U/S 17 POCSO, for abetment in committing the offences U/Ss 3 & 4 of POCSO, carries punishment with imprisonment for a term of not less than 7 years but may extend to imprisonment for life. The applicants/accused, however, have not been charged for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. Section 29 of POCSO Act, 2012 talks of presumption as to certain offences, where a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under Sections 3, 5, 7 & Section 9 of the Act, the Special Court shall presume, that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence, as the case may be unless the contrary is proved.