Sign in

Chandigarh court denies bail to man who raped, impregnated minor

The prosecution opposed the bail plea, stating that the allegations were serious in nature; if granted relief of bail, the rape accused may flee from the court’s jurisdiction

Updated on: Jun 9, 2023, 01:34:37 IST
By , Chandigarh
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

A fast-track POCSO court has dismissed the bail application of a 22-year-old Panchkula resident, who is accused of raping and impregnating a minor girl in 2021.

During counselling, the minor girl revealed that she was in a relationship with a boy named Pardeep, who, along with three other men, Manish, Hanish and Bharat, had raped her. (Getty Images/Purestock)
During counselling, the minor girl revealed that she was in a relationship with a boy named Pardeep, who, along with three other men, Manish, Hanish and Bharat, had raped her. (Getty Images/Purestock)

The accused, Bharat, a resident of Sector 8, Panchkula, was booked under Sections 376 (2) (n) (whoever commits rape repeatedly on the same woman) and 506 (criminal intimation) of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act at the Mauli Jagran police station on March 30, 2022.

The case was registered on the complaint of Apoorva Gandhi, a counsellor at Nari Niketan, Sector 26.

She said a minor girl was under observation at the centre in connection with an FIR registered at the Mauli Jagran police station in December 2021.

During counselling, the girl revealed that she was in a relationship with a boy named Pardeep, who, along with three other men, Manish, Hanish and Bharat, had raped her.

She disclosed that Bharat had raped her several times at her house and other locations. On December 4, 2021, she delivered a baby with the help of a mid­wife. Following this revelation, a case was registered. Bharat was eventually arrested and a DNA paternity test confirmed that he was the biological father of the newborn.

In his bail application, Bharat’s counsel claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case.

The prosecution opposed the bail plea, stating that the allegations were serious in nature. If granted relief of bail, the accused may flee from the court’s jurisdiction. It was submitted that the Central Forensic Science Laboratory report on the file supported the prosecution case.

After hearing the arguments, the court denied bail to the accused.