MERILIN WAHLANG Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. S. Nongsiej, learned counsel for the petitioner who is the wife of the accused person, Shri. Thosterning Lyngdoh Nonglait. The learned counsel has submitted that the accused person in question was arrested on 12/3/2023 in connection with Diengpasoh P.S. Case No. 01(03) of 2023 under Sec. 5(g)/6 of the POCSO Act. The case in the meantime has been charge sheeted and has now proceeded for trial. Till date only one witness has been examined out of the 32 witnesses.

(2.) The learned counsel has also submitted that this is the second bail application preferred before this Court, the earlier one being disposed of vide order dtd. 12/6/2024. As has been the submission in the earlier bail application, the petitioner would stress on the fact that that in spite of the relevant provision of Sec. 35 of the POCSO Act which provides for speedy trial inasmuch as the trial court is mandated to complete the trial within a period of one year, however till date after more than one year, as has been submitted only one witness has been examined. Therefore the concept of speedy trial has been defeated as far as the case involving the accused person is concerned.

(3.) The learned counsel has also submitted that in the previous order dtd. 12/6/2024 noticing this aspect of the matter this Court has directed the trial court to frame the charges at the earliest and to commence with the actual trial which was done so. However, again, as has been submitted, till date only one witness has been examined. The witness though being the survivor was examined by the court only two and a half months ago. This being the case the right of the accused being deprived inasmuch as the cause for speedy trial being hampered even admitting that the charges are serious in nature nevertheless under the facts and circumstances of this case, the accused person in question is entitled to be granted bail.