Bail in grave child rape-murder allegations was set aside for ignoring seriousness, prima facie material, and antecedents.

Bail in a case alleging rape and murder of an eleven-year-old child was found unsustainable because the High Court had relied mainly on parity with a co-accused without properly considering the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, incriminating material, and the accused's criminal antecedents. Statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC were relevant to assess a prima facie case at the bail stage in such a serious matter. The bail order was held to suffer from non-application of mind and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail granted to the accused in a case involving alleged rape and murder of a child was justified in the face of the gravity of the offence, incriminating material, and the accused's criminal antecedents.

Analysis: The allegations were of a heinous and dastardly offence, involving the alleged rape and cold-blooded murder of an eleven-year-old child and acts suggestive of destruction of evidence and evasion of law. The High Court had relied largely on parity with a co-accused without giving due weight to the seriousness of the accusations, the severity of punishment, the material on record, and the accused's past criminal involvement. Statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were relevant for assessing a prima facie case at the bail stage in such a grave matter. The impugned bail order was therefore found to suffer from non-application of mind.

Conclusion: The grant of bail was held unsustainable and was set aside.

---