On August 24, the Supreme Court granted bail to an octogenarian accused of rape after the DNA report was placed on record. The test results clearly claimed that the accused man was not the father of the child born to the rape victim.
Case:
An 80+ year-old man was booked under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, for allegedly raping a minor. The girl who delivered a baby on July 5 this year, had accused him of being the father of her child.
The man was denied bail by the Calcutta High Court and he had hence filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the top court. The accused had submitted that he was willing to undergo a DNA test to clarify that he was not responsible for the pregnancy of the daughter of the complainant girl. He submitted that his writ petition before the High Court in that regard is still pending.
Alleged False Case:
According to the accused, a false case has been lodged against him by the complainant who is his tenant, after there had been a dispute between them regarding non-payment of rent.
The matter came up before the Supreme court last month, where Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appeared for the man. Sibal submitted that the accused is aged 84, and was incapable of sexual activities. The senior advocate also proposed a DNA Test to clear the matter and further prayed for his release from jail. While the apex court denied bail to the elder gentleman, the bench had directed him to take the DNA test.
While hearing the matter after the test results, the bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ajay Rastogi, took note and observed:
Learned senior counsel for the appellant has a copy of the same and both the learned counsel are ad-idem on the fact that the DNA report does not show that the appellant is a father of the child born. In view of the aforesaid, we have no hesitation in saying that the appellant should be enlarged on bail on the terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
As regards the submission that it is out of a landlord-tenant dispute that a false case has been filed and that the accused should be given appropriate compensation, the bench said that it is for the accused to take necessary steps in this behalf in accordance with law claiming compensation in accordance with law.
CLICK HERE TO READ ORDER
READ REFERENCE CASE –
Supreme Court Denies Bail To 84-Year-Old Man In POCSO Case; Orders Paternity Test
We are now on Telegram. You can also join us on our Facebook Group
