news details |
|
|
| Court denies bail to rape accused | | | early times report
JAMMU, Dec : 02: Judicial Magistrate RS Pura Manjeet Rai today rejected the bail application of Bharat Bhushan who is facing charges of rape.
According to the police report, the father of prosecutrix has filed a written complaint in the police station RS Pura against one Bharat Bhushan stating that on October 19, 2010, the prosecutrix went outside the house and did not return back. The complainant enquired from the relatives about his daughter for two days but he could not get any clue and thereafter he filed a report in the p/s RS Pura about the disappearance of his daughter. The prosecutrix returned back to home and the complainant enquired from her as to whether she had gone. The prosecutrix told that Bharat Bushan used to rape her for a considerable period by making false promises of marrying with her. On October 19, 2010 Bharat Bhushan took the prosecutrix to Jammu and raped her as the prosecutrix believed that Bharat Bhushan would marry her. When Bharat Bhushan refused to marry the prosecutrix, she came back her home. On this complaint FIR was registered u/s 376 RPC and the statement of the prosecutrix u/s 164-A CrPC recorded and the accused has been arrested on November 14, 2010.
While rejecting the bail application, Judicial Magistrate RS Pura Manjeet Rai after hearing Senior Prosecuting Officer Sanjay Kohli for the state and Advocate RS Chib for the appellant observed that allegations against the accused/applicant are that the daughter of complainant has been repeatedly raped by applicant on the false promise of performing marriage with her. The victim of the rape stating in the statement recorded u/s 164-A CrpC that when she was student of 8th class at that time she was at the age of 13 years, her parents had gone in the field for harvesting the crop and she was all alone in her house, in the meanwhile Bharat Bhushan who is the son of maternal aunt (MASSI) of her father came inside the house and forcibly committed rape and threatened her if she could tell her parents, he would kill her. Perusal of the statement of the victim further reveals that thereafter the applicant repeatedly raped the victim. Court further observed that courts to protect liberties of individuals, but this protection can be made to deserving one only since the term protection cannot be itself be terms to be absolute in any and every situation but stand qualified depending upon the exigencies of the situation. It is on this perspective fact that in the event of there being committal of heinous crime, it is the society that needs a protection from these elements, since the later are having the capability of spreading a reign of terror so as to disrupt the life of the people in the society. With these observations Court dismissed the bail application.
--JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
