Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Vansh Bhatti vs Ut Of Jammu And Kashmir on 13 May, 2025
Author: Rahul Bharti
Bench: Rahul Bharti
Serial No. 02
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Bail App. No. 147/2024
CrlM No. 1053/2024
c/w
Bail App. No. 41/2025
CrlM No. 267/2025
Vansh Bhatti, age 21 years,
S/o Late Bhaggu Bhatti,
Th. mother Rajji, age 44 years,
W/o Late Bhaggu Bhatti
Both residents of 3473/14,
Gali No. 11, Dhapai Road,
Amritsar
.....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Ayushman Kotwal, Advocate
in Bail App. No. 147/2024
Ms. Mehrukh Syedan, Advocate
in Bail App. No. 41/2025
(Through Virtual Mode)
Vs
1. UT of Jammu and Kashmir,
Th. SHO Police Station, Bakshi Nagar,
Jammu.
2. Victim "K",
D/o Late Tony Masih,
R/o Resham Ghar, Colony, Jammu
..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Rozina Afzal, Advocate
CORAM: HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
ORDER
(13.05.2025)
01. A case of missing thirteen years old girl led to registration
of FIR No. 0211/2022 dated 22.12.2022 with the Police
Station, Bakshi Nagar, Jammu by her worried mother,
namely, Suman, stating therein that her daughter, as
2 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
named in the FIR aged thirteen years, has gone missing
from the home from 7 p.m. on 20.12.2022 only to find
her coming back to home on the next day on 21.12.2022
at 7 a.m. to be told by her that one Vansh Bhatti along
with two other persons had taken her away from
Reshamgarh Park to unknown places thus, alleging
commission of offence under section 363 IPC and
registration of FIR for the said offence. In the said FIR,
names of the accused persons were left unmentioned by
reference to be Unknown.
02. The investigation of the case came to be taken up by the
Police Station, Bakshi Nagar, Jammu assigned to Sub-
Inspector-Ishtyaq Mohammad, and resulted in
presentation of a final police report/challan No. 07/2023
dated 22.02.2023 thereby booking three persons, namely,
Vansh Bhatti, as accused No. 1, Sachin Masih, as
accused No. 2 and Satifan, accused No. 3, all arrested for
alleged commission of offences under sections
363/109/376-D of Indian Penal Code read with
sections 5/6/17 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short, „POCSO Act‟)
which led to the commencement of criminal trial against
the said three accused persons before the court of
learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, (POCSO
3 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
CASES), Jammu on its file/challan No. 08 of 2023 date of
institution 23.02.2023.
03. In the final police report, the investigating officer came to
enlist (23) twenty three prosecution witnesses which
includes the first informant Mst. Suman, the mother of
the minor crime victim and also the victim herself.
04. The investigating officer came up with the factual version
of the case that the minor victim was abducted from
Reshamgarh, Colony near Park by three accused persons
by use of a vehicle bearing registration No. HR26BM-
4416 (Toyota Innova) and upon her abduction by the said
three accused persons she is said to have been sedated
by an oral administration of a pill and then taken to
Gajansoo Marh at a place known as Manohar Palace
whereat the minor girl remained under the alleged
capture of the three accused persons and allegedly
subjected to rape/penetrative sexual assault. The date of
birth of the minor victim girl from her school record is
07.09.2010.
05. During the trial of the case, all the three accused
persons, being in under-trial custody, came to apply at
different points of time at their individual level for bail.
06. The trial court, vide its order dated 02.07.2024, came to
grant bail in favour of the accused No. 3-Satifan dealing
4 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
with his bail application on the merits of the case and the
prosecution evidence which by the time of consideration
of bail application had come on record.
07. In so far as the bail applications filed by the accused No.
1-Vansh Bhatti and accused No. 2-Sachin Masih are
concerned, both the applications came to be dismissed by
long-drawn reasoned orders dated 02.07.2024 and
22.11.2024 respectively.
08. Both the accused persons came forward with their
respective bail petitions preferred before this court after
having suffered rejection of bail application from the
court below.
09. The petitioner-Vansh Bhatti, as accused No. 1, came with
bail petition bearing No. 147/2024 filed on 09.07.2024
whereas petitioner-Sachin Masih, accused No. 2, came
forward with the bail petition bearing No. 41/2025 filed
on 10.02.2025.
10. In both the petitions, the two accused persons have come
forward with their respective versions to claim that
evidence which so far has come on record and in
particular, the medical evidence, which has come on
record with examination of Dr. Rajni Gupta, prosecution
witness No. 15’s, medical opinion confirm that there was
no recent evidence of sexual intercourse on the date of
5 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
medical examination of the minor victim which took place
on 22.12.2022.
11. By making a heavy exploit of the medical opinion which
has come on the record, both petitioners as accused
persons in their petitions are pleading that their
continuing detention as an under-trial is antithesis to a
fair criminal trial and law of bail.
12. Before this court proceeds to adjudicate present two bail
petitions, it needs to be taken into consideration the
dates of passing of orders whereby the trial court came to
reject the respective bail applications of the two
petitioners.
13. Bail petition filed by the petitioner-Vansh Bhatti before
the trial court came to be dismissed on 02.07.2024
whereas the bail petition of the petitioner-Sachin Masih
came to be dismissed on 22.11.2024.
14. By the time, the two petitioners came up with the present
bail petitions before this court, no sufficient time interval
had come to take place for them to expect that what they
failed to earn from the trial court on the basis of the
merits of the case would come rushing to them by
institution of the bail petitions before the High Court of
J&K and Ladakh.
6 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
15. If this court undertakes to deal with the main plank of
the petitioners’ bail pleas that medical examination
exonerates them from the accusation of having
committed rape of the minor victim then any observation
in negating the said plea of the petitioners may hurt and
haunt them in terms of their trial having a serious
bearing on the final outcome and this is where this court
would act and stay on the side of the caution and refrain
from undertaking evaluation of the medical report and
the testimony which has come in the case.
16. This court cannot lose sight of the fact that the alleged
commission of offences on the part of the accused
persons is against thirteen years aged minor girl. Now,
whether the offence under section 376-D IPC, is made
out or not may not have much significance at this stage
of the case bearing in mind the fact that the accusation of
commission of offence under section 363 IPC which
entails punishment for a term which may extend to seven
years and for offences under sections 5 and 6 of POCSO
Act, 2012 which entail punishment for a term not less
than 20 years are also in play and therefore, just by mere
exploit of the fact that the medical evidence/opinion on
record is purportedly ruling out recent sexual intercourse
upon the victim-minor girl may not be a weighty reason
7 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
in itself available at the end of the petitioners to claim
that they deserve grant of bail in their favour.
17. This court is being apprised that prime prosecution
witnesses have come to be examined in the case and only
the formal witnesses are awaited to be examined and that
should also be considered in the matter of grant of bail to
the petitioners so as to save them from suffering
persecution during the remainder course of the criminal
trial.
18. This plea of the petitioners can be taken care of not by
considering their plea for grant of bail but by calling upon
the court below to ensure prompt examination of the
remaining prosecution witnesses by undertaking their
summoning from its own end rather than leaving it for
the Prosecution to come up with production of
prosecution witnesses at a snail pace at its own leisure,
therefore, the two bail petitions are hereby dismissed
with a direction to the trial court to ensure that there
takes place speedy trial of the accused persons by
examination of remaining of the prosecution witnesses by
dispensing wasteful adjournments and summoning the
remaining prosecution witnesses by its own processes.
8 Bail App. No. 147/2024
a/w connected matter
19. Copy of this order be sent to learned Special Judge, Fast
Track Court, (POCSO CASES), Jammu through Registrar
Judicial, Jammu for its notice and compliance.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
JAMMU
13.05.2025
SUNIL
[ad_1]
Source link