Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, July 24: A local court here refused to grant bail to an accused involved in sexual assault on a minor girl citing the witnesses are yet to examined by the court.
The Fast Track Court POCSO cases Srinagar has refused to grant bail to an accused Amit Ambardar, actual resident of Janipur Jammu on the ground that there are still material witnesses who are left to be examined including the minor sister of the victim who is an important witness of the case.
Court said since the witnesses including sister of victim has not been examined as yet and in case accused is admitted to bail there is ample chances that he may tamper with the evidence by intimidating or winning over the prosecution witnesses.
As per prosecution case on March 31 last year a complainant was received from a resident of Baramulla who was putting up at a rented house at Nowshara Srinagar stating therein that his two minor daughters were playing in the lawn of the house and one, Amit Ambardar, who was also residing on ground floor in the same house, called the two minors in his room and gave some money to one and sent her outside to purchase some sweets and then allegedly ‘attempted to rape’ on his second daughter.
Accordingly, a case (FIR No 27/2022) under Sections 376-AB IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act was registered against the accused. The prosecution in opposition of the bail contended the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of CrPC and her medical examination was also conducted and during the investigation, it has come to fore that the offences under Section 376-AB IPC and 7/8 of POCSO Act were established against Ambardar and a chargesheet was presented against him before the concerned court.
The court while dealing with the case said, the accused has been charged for commission of offence of POCSO Act as such the presumption under Section 29 of the Act would stand triggered against him.
Court further added that there is no doubt that the other two witnesses have turned hostile; however, considering the statement given by the minor victim (name withheld), the accused has not been able to derive much benefit from the statements of hostile witnesses.
“Without commenting much upon the evidence led so far it would be sufficient to say that the presumption against the accused stands strong like a rock and has not been dislodged. It is settled law that the solitary testimony of the victim is sufficient if the same is found to be credible and no corroboration of the same is required”, Presiding Officer of the court said.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel