Victim ka 164 bad me hua kyuki vegetative state me thi….

trial k pehle kr lenge…shubhangi kregi

Medical reports came in

7 jan mar peet rape..After she was chased and briught back in the house. jalal tied her. Then jalal who
went to buy food, came back… he told him then they got aggravated and raped her. Then locked and ran
away thinking she died bcz she was in too vegetative state.

Cellular records – 3 jan ko dopahar tk he was in gaya ..he won a goldmedal. But at night at 8..he was In
patna…and did it.

Girl’s 164 or recovery?

CONTEST BAIL PETITION

1. The petition is not maintainable- Where the police had already added the offence under the
POCSO Act, only the Special Court under the POCSO Act could have entertained the bail application
under the said Act2- Ramu Ram vs. St. of Rajasthan and Ors. RLW 2014 (2) RAJ 987

2. Contesting Alibi (para 10 and 16)- moot program was over in the noon while the kidnapping
took place at night 9.15. so he had plenty time to come back to patna. As per 103 evidene act the
petitioners have to prove that he was elsewhere at the time of incident which has not be sufficiently
explained I order to shift the burden. The prosecution giving proves for the possibility that he was in the
area are enough to believe in the possibility that the accused was not in GAYA. Doodhnath pandey v.
state of bihar

3. Family members didn’t describe him or his bike (para 8)- he called them at 5 am and stated bla
bla. Proof is CDR.

4. Prima Facie Case- CDR, cellualar records of him being in the bita area where the girl has been
recovered…she is in pmch in vegetative state (Dr. Tarika affidavit), which is enough to give an idea to this
empathetic court that the nature of accusation is grave as per s. 438(1). The discretion under Section
438 cannot be exercised with regard to offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life unless
the court at that very stage is satisfied that such a charge appears to be false or groundless. (Gurbaksh
Singh Sibbia and Others v. State of Punjab, 198) Why counsel is goin in so much intricacies is because
The cases in which accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 IPC, the Court should
consider with even greater care and caution; (susheela Aggarwal v nct delhi 2020).

5. Delay in FIR- condonation plead kre ya ni?

6. they suspect him because of the old story. The court needs to know this bcz they talked of the
animosity since before in para 12 so the court should be enlightened upon th fact as to why the
animosity exist in the forst place which also throws light on his character plus gives us aan insight as to
how this person is likely to harm other family members aand the victim (they talked of his good
character so we can enlighten the court about his bad character)

• Gurubaksh Sibbai is 6 judge bench

• S. 53A character of victim not relevant.