Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court in a ruling clarified that it was mandatory to inform the victim or the complainant while granting bail to the accused in the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act) case. The bench headed by Justice Savanur Vishwajith Shetty of the High Court in his order cancelled the bail granted to the accused by a trial court in the POCSO case. A directive was also issued by the High Court regarding rules to be followed by the courts while hearing the bail application of the accused in POCSO cases.
What was the case?
The victim, who attained the age of 24 years, was a minor girl in 2014, and she was studying in Class IX. The accused fell in love with the victim and started visiting her house frequently. The victim did not agree to the "love proposal" offered by the accused. In the meantime, the accused took her to a tourist spot and sexually assaulted her at a desolate place. In 2017, when the victim's parents had gone out, the accused visited the victim's house at night and sexually assaulted her against her will. The act was repeated several times.
In 2020, the victim became pregnant and the accused took her to a hospital for an abortion. The pre-wedding engagement proposal between the duo took place in 2021. But, the accused shrugged off the marriage proposal and told his parents that he did not want to marry her. The accused also sent his friends to the victim's house and threatened her (the victim) with dire consequences. In 2022, the victim lodged a complaint with the police station concerned in this regard.
Also read: NEET PG 2023: Karnataka HC issues notice to Centre on reducing cut-off to zero
The accused was arrested by the police following the registration of the case against him under various Sections of the IPC, including rape, sexual assault as well as POCSO Act. The accused was granted bail by the trial court on December 30, 2022. The victim then approached the Karnataka High Court questioning the bail granted to the accused by the trial court. The victim raised an objection before the High Court stating that the accused was granted bail without listening to her argument or plea.
Now, the Karnataka High Court has cancelled the order granting bail to the accused by the trial court. In addition, the High Court ordered the trial court to hear the victim's argument and settle the bail application of the accused on the basis of merit.
What was the High Court's directive?
If an accused in a POCSO case applies for general or anticipatory bail, the Court Registry should provide information about the application and its date of hearing to the victim or complainant. Suppose the accused had applied for interim bail, in such a situation the trial court might issue an appropriate order citing reasons. If the informant/victim was not available, the prosecution (government) should submit a factual report citing those reasons.
Also, if the informant/victim does not participate in the hearing even after giving the information, the court may decide the bail plea of the accused on merit. Informants/victims, who are minors, should not be made party to the proceedings.
Notice cannot be issued to a minor informer/victim. A notice should be given to the parents or guardians of the minor. If the accused does not make the victim/informant a respondent in the bail application, then the Court Registry should take action to serve notice on him. The bail application should be disposed of only after hearing the arguments of the victim, the High Court stated in its order.
