Order Below Exh.1 in Cri.B.Appln.No.353/2022 CNR NO.MHNS010011902022
Amandeep Pramod Sharma Vs. State.
Heard:
Ld. Adv. Mr. G. L. Bodke for the applicant.
Ld. A.P.P. Ms. S.S. Sangle for the State.
Perused the say filed by the complainant/victim.
1] This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in Crime No.157/2020 registered at Police Station, Wadiwrhe, Dist. Nashik for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & Section 4, 8 & 12 of the POCSO Act, 2012. It is the case of prosecution in brief that the applicant accused kidnapped the minor victim and committed sexual intercourse with her due to which she gave birth to a child.
2] Ld. Adv. for the applicant has submitted that the victim is now 17 years old. She belongs to Adivasi Samaj where such things are prevalent. She had a loveaffair with the applicant. No purpose will therefore be served by keeping the applicant behind bars.
3] Per contra Ld.A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application on the ground that offence is serious in nature and the victim was only 15 years old on the date of occurrence of the offence. She was missing for almost 2 years. The applicant has been arrested only on 09/03/2022. The applicant does not belong to the Adivasi community. Investigation is in progress and chargesheet is yet to be filed. If the application is released on bail there are chances of his tampering with prosecution witnesses.
4] It is a welldocumented fact (including by the United Nations) that early motherhood (in teenage) robs these girls of education and optimum health and also deprives them from reaching their full potential. The applicant was absconding for long and had shifted to another State along with the victim. Getting married to the victim can in no way be considered as a panacea. Perusal of the case diary indicates primafacie case against the applicant. The very fact that the victim has filed her ‘noobjection’ to the application being granted itself indicates that prosecution witnesses are already being tampered with. Moreover, victim was brought before the Court by the ld. Advocate for the applicant. The minor victim was brought to the Court with the newborn premature Baby to make the statement. Assuming that the applicant had indeed married the victim, even then, childmarriage of such a young girl cannot be permitted under the guise of a loveaffair. Investigation is at nascent stage. 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 is also wellfounded. In view of the foregoing discussion, I am inclined to reject the application.
ORDER
Application is hereby rejected.
Digitally signed by MRIDULA MRIDULA BHATIA BHATIA Date: 2022.03.24 11:40:53 +0530 Nashik Mridula Bhatia 23/03/2022 District Judge2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik.