PAMPORE: The J&K High Court on Saturday dismissed the bail plea of a judicial officer accused of committing rape against a domestic help.
Justice Sanjay Dhar said, “In regard to the nature of the statements of prosecution witnesses, particularly the statement of the prosecutrix, this Court is unable to record an opinion, even a prima facie opinion, that the case of prosecution against the petitioner is frivolous.”
The court also held that the bail rejection order passed by Sessions Judge, Jammu, was well founded against petitioner/ accused Rakesh Kumar Abrol.
Justice Dhar also observed there was material on record of the trial court to prima facie connect the petitioner to the alleged crime of rape.
“There can be no dispute to the fact that rape is a heinous crime which entails punishment up to life imprisonment. The offence of rape not only destroys the victim physically, but it also shatters her mentally as well. So, a lenient view in such matters is out of question,” Justice Dhar said.
It was recorded by court that the petitioner was a Judicial officer, a person in the position of authority, and the victim happened to be a person from the
lowest strata of society, which makes the crime more serious.
“The position of accused vis-a-vis the victim is an important factor while considering a bail application. Higher the status of a person, greater is the standard of conduct expected by the society from him. Therefore, more responsibility lies on the persons holding high offices like that of a
Judge to remain above board in their public as well as private life,” the court said.
Justice Dhar said that a judgment or order of a court of law derives its authority and respect not only from the quality it possesses but also from the integrity and rectitude of its author.
“Once a Judge falls off from ethical and moral standards, his judgments and orders are viewed with suspicion. Therefore, when a Judicial Officer is implicated in an offence of rape, which does involve moral turpitude, the Courts cannot treat it as any other routine case of rape, but the same has to be dealt with ona different footing with more severity and all seriousness,” court said.
Earlier, the accused officer was approached by the victim for legal help in 2005 wherein he later on insisted her to work as domestic help.
The victim after some time decided to leave the work but the accused insisted that she stay back. He in a deceitful manner married her despite being married to another woman.
Later, the accused and his wife patched up and threw the victim out of their house.