news details |
|
|
| HC takes cognizance of petition challenging interim bail to Talib, directs Sessions Judge not to pass final order | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Oct 25: A rape victim (name withheld) has filed a petition in High Court seeking quashing of the interim bail order of Talib Hussain granted in a rape case on 12-10-2018 by Sessions Judge Samba R.K. Wattal. The case was listed today before the bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta in the High Court.
Advocate A K Sawhney appearing for rape victim pointed out to the High Court the illegalities of the interim bail order passed in favour of Talib accused in the rape case. Sawhney said that the bail application was moved on 20-8-2018 before Sessions Judge Samba and the public prosecutor was directed to file objections. Sawhney moved an application for impleading Prosecutrix (complaint) as a party in the bail application. The application was allowed. On 20-8-2018 the case was listed for arguments, on 31-8-2018 Sawhney argued the matter before the Court of Sessions Judge, Samba and arguments were concluded on both the sides of the bail application was fixed the judgment on 4-9-2018 the judgment was not announced.
On 4-9-2018 and the case along with bail application was listed on 8-9-2018. However, charge was framed under sections 376, 4/25 Arms Act and Prima Facie it was proved that the trial is to go for rape charges. On 8-9-2018 judgment was deferred for 13-9-2018. On 13-9-2018 also the judgment in bail application was not announced and the case was listed on 25-9-2018.
On 25-9-2018 the judgment was not announced and judgment was deferred for 4-10-2018. On 4-10-2018 also the Sessions Court, Samba did not announce the order in bail application. However, on 4-10-2018 the prosecutrix statement was recorded and fully supported her version which was recorded u/s 164-A Criminal Procedure Code. So much so prosecutrix told the court that her life is in danger and she may be protected.
This statement was made in the camera which was recorded by the court and the case was recorded in the court the case was deferred the judgment in the bail application was again deferred from 4-10-2018 to 12-10-2018. On 12-10-2018 one of the prosecution witness was present in the court whose statement was to be recorded in the rape case but the Trial Court did not recorded his statement and posted the case for 27-10-2018 the bail order application was also deferred for 27-10-18 but meanwhile the Trial Court granted the interim bail order by a lengthy order.
The said order was challenged before the High Court and the arguments were heard by Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta and issued notice. The High Court directed the trial court not to pass final bail order on 27-10-2018 and the scanned record has been called for and the case is listed for the further proceedings on 31-10-2018. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
