Patna HC dismisses pre-arrest bail plea of DSP accused of raping minor maid in govt quarter

The Patna High Court recently dismissed the anticipatory bail plea moved by a suspended Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) accused in a minor’s rape case.

The allegations against the DSP are that he raped the minor at his government quarter in 2017 when her brother had left her there to be shifted to Patna the next day to serve the DSP’s wife.

The accused DSP sought relief alleging there was an inordinate delay of four years in lodging of the FIR and the victim was not a minor at the time of the alleged incident, therefore, POCSO Act was not attracted in the present case.

However, the DSP’s pre-arrest bail plea was opposed by the counsel for the informant in the case (the victim’s brother).

Senior Counsel Amit Srivastava, appearing for the informant, submitted that the case diary showed that the victim girl had fully supported the prosecution story and had stated that while she was sleeping in the night, the petitioner forcefully opened the door and thereafter committed rape and further threatened that if she raised alarm, she would be killed.

Next day, she came to Patna along with his brother, she was continuously crying and when the wife of the DSP asked her the reason for crying, she narrated everything to her, the victim had told.

Further, the Senior Counsel submitted that when the wife of the DSP came to know about the incident, she called a police officer posted at Gaya Women Police Station informing her that the girl has been raped by her husband. However, the lady Police Officer instead of taking note of her allegations chose to stay silent.

Moreover, the Senior Counsel informed the court that later on, the concerned police officer accepted her fault that when in 2017, she received a call from Patna and came to know about the alleged rape, she informed the accused DSP who scolded her and threatened to remove her from her job, therefore, she decided not to take any action on the complaint.

Thereafter, in 2021, the brother of the victim, lodged a complaint and thereupon a case was registered under Sections 6/9 (I) (c) of the POCSO Act, Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and Section 376 (2) (a) (iii), 376 (2) (b), 376 (3) of the Indian Penal Code.

The Senior Counsel, therefore, asserted that the delay had been fully explained.

The bench of Justice Rajiv Roy noted that from the case diary it was very clear that the very next day of the incident in 2017 itself, the victim girl had explained the incident to the DSP’s wife and also the school certificate of the victim incorporated her date of birth as 16.05.2003, which showed that in 2017, she was still a minor.

“The petitioner being a Police Officer was duty bound to protect the victim girl but he himself became a predator and in the process, raped her and there was no one in the government quarter to save her from the alleged act of the petitioner,” Court observed.

Therefore, finding no merit in the anticipatory bail application, court rejected the same.

Case Title: SRI KAMLA KANT PRASAD v. STATE OF BIHAR

Statute: Indian Penal Code, SC/ST (POA) Act, POCSO Act