Order Below Exh.1 in Cri.B.A.No.474/2022 CNR NO.MHNS010018132022

Sukdev Tukaram Pawar Vs. State.

Heard : Ld. Adv. Mr. S. S. Khare for the applicant.
Ld. A.P.P. Ms. S. S. Sangle for the State.

1.This is an application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.135/2022 registered at Police Station, Ambad, Nashik for the offence punishable under Sec. 354­A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 8 & 12 of the POCSO, 2012. (POCSO) It is the case of prosecution in brief that the 62 year­old applicant/accused molested
the 4 year­old victim by removing her pantie and running his fingers on her vxgxxa.

2. Ld. Adv. for the applicant has submitted that investigation is over and charge­sheet has been filed. There is delay in lodging FIR. The alleged incident occurred in a well­inhabited locality.

The applicant is a senior citizen. There is no eye witness to the incident. The FIR and its contents appear to be clearly contrived. Applicant is ready to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by the Court.

3.Per contra, Ld. A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that perusal of the charge­sheet discloses prima­facie case against the applicant. There is no reason for a 4 year­ old child to speak falsehood of such nature and absolutely no reason for her parents to lodge a false FIR. If the applicant is released on bail, there are chances of his committing similar offences and fleeing from
justice.

4.Perusal of the charge­sheet discloses prima­facie case against cthe applicant. There is no connection between age of a person and his inability to commit sexual offence of this nature. It is a well­ documented scientific fact that many pedophiles are senior citizens. Similarly, it is not implausible that an offence of such a nature can be committed in a well­inhabited locality. There is no reason for a child of such tender age to speak falsehood of such nature.

Admittedly, applicant is the neighbour of the victim. Therefore, apprehension of the Ld. A.P.P. that if the applicant is released on bail, there are chances of his tampering with prosecution witnesses and committing similar offences with other children is well­founded. In view thereof, I am inclined to reject the bail application.

ORDER

The application is hereby rejected.

MRIDULA BHATIA Nashik 21/04/2022 Digitally signed by MRIDULA BHATIA Date: 2022.04.21 19:00:12
+0530 Mridula Bhatia District Judge­ 2 and Addl.Sessions Judge Nashik.