DHARANI PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with Subalaya P.S. Case No. 18 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 58 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned SDJM, Birmaharajpur for alleged commission of offences under Sections 376(2)(h)/294/323/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1) (xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as SC/ST Act ).

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an F.I.R. was lodged by the victim alleging therein that she had love affair with one Anil Pradhan, the son of the present petitioners since last three years and on 15.3.2014, while she was returning home, the said Anil Pradhan forcibly took her inside his house and cohabited with her. It is alleged that the present petitioners came at that point of time, abused her and also assaulted her for which she became senseless. He further submits that the main accused is Anil Pradhan as it appears from the case records and the only allegation against the petitioners is that they abused the informant/victim and assaulted her. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in view of the allegations made, neither the ingredients of offence under Section 376(2)(h) of the IPC nor Section 4 of POCSO Act is made out against the petitioners and it may at best be a case under Sections 294 and 323 IPC against them.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, after producing the case diary, places the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and submits that though the victim/informant alleged the main offences against Anil Pradhan, but she has also stated that while she was inside the house of Anil Pradhan, the petitioners came there and abused her for spoiling their son and told him that she belongs to a lower caste and thus anticipatory bail cannot be entertained in view of the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.