Granting Bail Does Not Shield Foreign Nationals from Executive Action on Visa Violations: Delhi High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Misused to Resolve Substantive Disputes or Replace Execution Mechanisms: P&H High Court Eviction Proceedings Must Follow Principles of Natural Justice: Telangana High Court Quashes Eviction Order under Senior Citizens Act Limitation Law | Sufficient Cause Cannot Be Liberally Interpreted If Negligence or Inaction Is Apparent: Gujarat High Court Mere Pendency of Lease Renewal Requests Does Not Constitute Bona Fide Dispute: Calcutta High Court Upholds Eviction Proceedings Under Public Premises Act CGST | Declaratory Nature of Safari Retreats Ruling Mandates Reassessment of Input Tax Credit Claims: Kerala High Court Changing Rules of the Game Mid-Way Violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution: Rajasthan High Court Disapproval of a Relationship Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide Without Direct Instigation or Mens Rea: Supreme Court Limitation Period Under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act Cannot Defeat Victim’s Right to Compensation: Gujarat High Court Maintenance To Wife Cannot Be a Precondition for Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 438 CrPC Court Cannot Rewrite Contract When Vendor Lacks Ownership of the Property: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Appeal for Specific Performance Royalty Can Be Levied on Minor Minerals Like Brick Earth, Irrespective of Land Ownership: Supreme Court Bail in Heinous Crimes Must Be Granted with Adequate Reasons and Judicial Scrutiny: Supreme Court Judicial Review in Disciplinary Cases Is Limited to Fairness, Not Reappreciation of Evidence: Supreme Court Prolonged Consensual Relationship Cannot Be Criminalized as Rape on False Promise of Marriage: Madras High Court No Interference in Judgments Without Perversity or Legal Error Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh HC

Gauhati High Court Cancels Bail of Accused in Horrific Child Sexual Assault Case, Orders Strict Witness Protection

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 21 July 2023, Gauhati High Court, acting on its own, has cancelled the bail granted to the accused Yumken Bagra in a heinous case of sexual assault on 21 innocent children. The accused, a Hostel Warden at a Government Residential School in Karo Village, Monigong, Shi Yomi District, Arunachal Pradesh, is alleged to have committed the grave offences between 2019 to 2022, affecting 15 girls and 6 boys aged 6 to 12 years.

The court took cognizance of the matter after being “shocked” by news articles published in “Purvanchal Prahari” and “The Arunachal Times,” which reported on the granting of bail to the accused. The Court registered a suo moto cancellation of bail application, signaling its concern for the safety of the young victims.

A thorough examination of the case records revealed the gravity of the accusations. The children, who were under the age of 15 when the alleged acts occurred, were subjected to repeated sexual assaults by the accused, who was entrusted with their care as the Hostel Warden. The victims’ statements and medical reports corroborated the horrifying incidents.

The Court, in its judgment, expressed its dismay over the casual manner in which the Special Court granted bail to the accused, despite substantial objections raised by the Special Public Prosecutor. The prosecution had highlighted the risk of witness tampering and evidence tampering as valid reasons to deny bail. Nevertheless, the accused was released on bail, much to the Court’s concern.

“The conscience of the Court has been shaken by the way in which a case of such grave magnitude and sensitive nature has been dealt with in an absolutely cavalier fashion by granting bail to the main accused without assigning any plausible reasons,” the Chief Justice remarked in the judgment.

Recognizing the urgency of the matter, the Court ordered the issuance of notice of bail cancellation proceedings to the accused Yumken Bagra, son of Late Niyum Bagra, and directed the Advocate General of Arunachal Pradesh to ensure service upon the accused through the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police Station.

Additionally, the Court emphasized the need for strict implementation of the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018, to safeguard the victims and their families from any potential harm. It directed the Director General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh, to put in place full security measures for all the victims and their families. 

The Court also underscored the importance of sensitizing Special Judges handling cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). It mandated that the Judicial Academy, Assam, initiate immediate training and sensitization for all Judicial Officers dealing with POCSO Act cases in the States of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Arunachal Pradesh.

The case is now set to be listed for further hearing on 27th July 2023.                                                

D.D-21th July 2023.  

X X X      VERSUS   IN RE- STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

Similar News