Recently, the Delhi High Court granted bail to a man accused of raping a minor girl aged two and a half years, noting a delay of eight hours in filing the FIR. The girl is two-and-a-half years old in the case. According to IPC Sections 376 AB (rape of women under the age of 12) and Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act.
The prosecutrix being 2 ½ years old, due to which her statement was not recorded, nonetheless, without dwelling with the merits of the prosecution case and keeping in mind the fact that there is a delay of 8 hours in registration of FIR, I am of the view that petitioner deserves bail,” the decision passed by a Single Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait.
After finding that there was an 8-hour delay in FIR registration, the Delhi High Court granted bail to a rape victim. The girl is two-and-a-half years old in the case.
When such a heinous crime occurred with a little child, the Bench considered why FIR was not reported immediately said the Justice.
The CCTV video was used by court and in the CCTV footage, the victim’s father was outside the house. The defendant entered the building, and he is seen finding the petitioner and getting him out within a minute. The plaintiff saw the accused in a drunken state and reportedly heard him “insisting that the victim perform oral sex,” according to the case reported at a South Delhi district police station last year. The plaintiff even told the police while he was with the victim that the zip of the accused’s trousers was open.
If there had been such a form of heinous crime and with that, a 2 1⁄2-year-old child, why the FIR was not reported immediately. According to the FIR, several residents assembled and beat the petitioner, reportedly in an intoxicated state, after which the petitioner was arrested, upon witnessing this event.
There is an 8-hour pause throughout the filing of the FIR because there was no indication of the petitioner’s beating and intoxication in the MLC so if the neighbor had beaten the petitioner and he was in a condition of intoxication then the said fact could have come through the MLC, however the said MLC indicates no sign of bruising or abrasion, suggesting that there was no public beating alleged in the FIR.
Accordingly, to the satisfaction of the trial court, he will be released on bail on his provision of a personal bond in the amount of Rs.15,000/- with one protection in the same amount.
Court held,
ln a catena of judgments, the Supreme Court held that even an 8-hour delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR) can be condoned if there is no justification for the witness to unfairly implicate the accused.
Delay in putting the statute in motion by lodging the lawsuit is generally seen in doubt by the courts since there is a risk of concoction of proof against the accused. In those situations, the prosecutor must justify the delay in FIR’s registration satisfactorily. Although there could be situations where the delay in FIR registration is probable and the same must be considered. Even though the witness has no justification for wrongly implying a long delay, it may be condoned.
Three Judge- Bench observation,
Normally, in the event of an unreasonable delay in presenting the first evidence report, the Court could dismiss the prosecution’s argument because of the possibility of submitting it.
It is the prosecution’s concoction of testimony. Therefore, whether the delay is explained satisfactorily. The Court is obligated to determine if, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the reason offered is reasonable enough. Whether the plaintiff seems to be credible, the delay can be condoned or not.
