Seeking Bail under section IPC 376
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 26 August 2010
This query is : Resolved
Hello everybody,
Accused(age 21 years) is now convicted under secion IPC 376 by session court, and also high court rejected the bail application (No. 229/2010). Actually medical report shows no evidance of rape on the victim. it is the money getting dispute from mother and father of the victim(age 14 years). so they get 5 witnesses and did their job because not giving the money.
So please can somebody guide that what should accused has to do either wait for filing second bail application or should go to supreme court.if first case then In how many days next application be filed?
But still question remains same because, if the victim is minor and bail is rejecting, conviction under 376. Then anybody can torture anyone if he has got 4 or 5 witnesses. any how court is not refering to the medical report then why they check medically? This offence is not happen in front of the witness.
What I learned in the school indian laws are made in the view of that it is ok that if guilty also not convicted but conviction should not give to non guilty person.
please mail on sincoscot@gmail.com
Awaiting for your guidance......
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 26 August 2010
You have not mentioned the quantum of sentence awarded to the convict by the sessions court. Since after conviction the appeal is pending before the High Court, every High Court has its own view point on grant of concession of suspension of sentence. Its better to wait for some time and then seek suspension of sentence from the High Court itself.
As far as facts are concerned, only those facts will be considered which have been proved in trial court by way of legal procedure.
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 26 August 2010
You have not mentioned the quantum of sentence awarded to the convict by the sessions court. Since after conviction the appeal is pending before the High Court, every High Court has its own view point on grant of concession of suspension of sentence. Its better to wait for some time and then seek suspension of sentence from the High Court itself.
As far as facts are concerned, only those facts will be considered which have been proved in trial court by way of legal procedure.
s.subramanian
(Expert) 26 August 2010
Yes. I agree with Mr.Kiran.
PJANARDHANA REDDY
(Expert) 26 August 2010
THE OFFENSE IS VERY SERIOUS IN NATURE, NATURALLY ONE SHOULD PROVE THE FACTS IN APPEAL AND GET RID OFF.
INDIAN LAWS ARE FOVOURING WOMEN AT LARGE, BUT INNOCENTS CANNOT TAKE RIDE, DISCUSS WITH YOUR LAWYER AND CHALK OUT THE POSSIBILITIES.
BAIL IS ALSO NOT INSTANT BUT TRY WITH SUCCESSIVE APPLICATIONS IN H.C ITSELF.
ANY FAVORABLE CONDITION PREVAIL WITH GOOD GROUNDS BAIL CAN BE ENLARGED. TRY....
pawan sharma
(Expert) 26 August 2010
yes, I do agree with Mr.Kiran.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 26 August 2010
The conviction and rejection of bail shows that the evidences and witnesses are against the accused.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 27 August 2010
Hello,
I am very happy that somebody listens me. thanks a lot.
Sorry, yesterday I could not able to attach the judgement given by the high court regarding the bail, you can have all details including term of sentense and the appeal condition with this.
Regarding the judgement of the trial court as far as facts are concerned,Trial court had proved the guilt by looking other side only. i.e.I mean to say it was defense oriented rather than offense oriented. No such a major fact come in front of the court.I just wanted to tell that even one witness declared hostile by the trial court itself.
Please guide me for the further action.
With warm Regards,
WHATSAPP 91-8075113965
(Expert) 27 August 2010
when accused has been convicted by sessions court with imprisonment for more than 3 years, the said sentence cannot be suspended by the same sessions court.but, the high court while admiting the appeal may or may not suspend the sentence. it is the discretionary power of the court. but, in your case,it is seen that it has not been suspended by the high court also.
you are absolutely right in assuming that law favours females better !
in the offences like these, it is very easy for a women to implicate anybody and get him convicted, as the burden proof of prosecution in such cases is very less.
see you case itself. ther is delay in loadging FIR, No corresponding medical evidence,witness turned hostile,
still the court s generally convict the accused in these type of offences.
it is known as MORAL CONVICTIONS. that is , there is no legal evidence, still the accused gets punished....!
i am also of the openion that burden of proof should always be on prosecution as enunciated by sec.101 of evidence act, in all criminal cases. that is , the person who makes an imputation/allegation has the duty to prove it.it is easy to make allegation and provide witnesses....if a crooked police officer is investigating the offence, he can also make forged documents also to prove his case.
i think, judicial officers should think , in that fashion......!
SALIL KUMAR.P
ADVOCATE
THALASSERY-670101
9447536929
advocatesalil@gmail.com
