The Delhi High Court has granted bail in a gang rape case, noting that two eyewitnesses examined in the case did not support the prosecution’s version. The accused has been in custody for over seven years.
The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma granted bail, emphasizing that the petitioner should not be kept in custody indefinitely while awaiting the trial’s outcome.
In this case, the prosecution’s evidence has already been examined, and two key eyewitnesses, PW4 and PW5, did not support the prosecution’s case. The petitioner has been in custody for over seven years. It was noted that, out of 33 witnesses, only 13 have been examined, and the trial may take a considerable amount of time to conclude.
Advocates Prashant Prakash and Qausar Khan appeared pro bono for the petitioner, a rickshaw puller, and argued that the case relies solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix. They further submitted that the FSL report does not support the prosecution’s case.
However, the Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the Delhi Police, opposed the bail application on the grounds that the prosecutrix has consistently and consistently provided a corroborated statement on oath. It was further argued that if the accused is granted bail, there is a risk that he may interfere with the trial.
According to the Delhi Police status report dated 02.02.2017, the victim, N, came to PS Sunlight Colony, Delhi, and provided a statement in which she stated that in October 2016, she arrived at New Delhi Railway Station by train, where she met a man. She further alleged that she was sexually assaulted by several individuals, including the man she met.
Based on the victim’s statement, an FIR was registered under sections 376/363/366/506/328/34 IPC. During the investigation, two accused were arrested on 03.02.2017. Potency tests were conducted on both accused, and relevant exhibits were seized. The victim’s statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C by the Metropolitan Magistrate, where she reaffirmed her previous statement Consequently, Section 6 of the POCSO Act was also incorporated into the case.
(This news report is published from a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has not been written or edited by OpIndia staff)
