V Narasingh, J. disposed of the bail application and restrained the Court to not grant any further adjournments and released the petitioner on bail.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The facts of the case are such that the petitioner is an CCL i.e. child in conflict with law and an accused on the files of Additional Session Judge-Cum- Special Judge Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act i.e. POCSO Act, Bargarh, arising out of J.G.R. under Sections 450/307/302/34/120-B of Penal Code, 1860 i.e. IPC and is in custody since 08-12-2018. Being aggrieved by the rejection of her application for bail U/s.439 Cr.P.C. by the Additional Session Judge-Cum- Special Judge POCSO Act, Bargarh, by order dated 23-07-2019 in the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL was filed. The petitioner is in custody since 08-12-2018. The Court called for up to date information of the investigation and the case by various notices but the case diary was not made available to this Court.
The court said that since December 21, 2018, as a detention petitioner, he will not be allowed to suffer due to the independence of the investigative agency. The procedure of the senior court cannot be the whim of the research institution a hostage, and the defendants rights cannot be alienated due to their unpleasant attitudes, but it is not necessary. The court said, “In fact, the management of the district police in question rarely respects the orders adopted by the court, and does not consider the repetitive communication of the general office of the defender. I am doing it. Presentation of newspapers in the case where the case needs to be postponed. »» The court also pointed out the necessary measures to make police machines more sensitive to judicial management needs. The court said in this way, “considering the age and childcare period of the applicant, this court is forced to not postpone the State Council.”
JUDGMENT REVIEWED BY Kunmun das