New Delhi, May 6 (IANS) The Delhi High Court has refused to grant regular bail to a maulvi (cleric) accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting a minor girl under the guise of spiritual treatment, observing that he had prima facie exploited the “vulnerable physical and mental condition” of the prosecutrix and the blind faith reposed in him by her family.

A single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while rejecting the bail application filed by Mohd Mubarak, observed that the allegations in the FIR registered at Prem Nagar Police Station under Section 376 IPC and the POCSO Act were grave and serious.

“This Court is of the view that the material placed on record prima facie reflects that the applicant took undue advantage of the vulnerable physical and mental condition of the prosecutrix as well as the blind faith reposed in him by her family,” the Delhi High Court said.

It added that the prosecutrix had allegedly been suffering from poor health for several years, due to which her family believed that she was under the influence of an evil spirit or “jinn” and had started approaching faith healers and persons performing “jhad-phoonk”.

According to the prosecution, the accused, who claimed himself to be a Maulvi and faith healer, was approached by the girl’s family in October 2019 on the recommendation of one of her father’s friends.

The FIR alleged that during the so-called treatment, the accused asked the girl “strange and inappropriate questions” and later visited her residence, where he insisted on treating her alone. Further, the accused had allegedly told the prosecutrix that the “jinn” affecting her could only be removed through obscene acts and thereafter sexually assaulted her. “Instead of providing any such help, the applicant allegedly misused that trust and exploited the prosecutrix under the guise of treatment,” Justice Sharma observed.

During the investigation, the prosecutrix’s statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded before a magistrate, wherein she alleged repeated sexual assault by the accused.

Seeking bail, counsel appearing for the accused argued that Mubarak had remained in judicial custody since October 10, 2019, for more than six years, and that his continued incarceration violated his right to personal liberty and speedy trial.

It was also argued that the investigation had already been completed, the charge sheet had been filed, and crucial witnesses, including the prosecutrix and her parents, had already been examined before the trial court.

The defence further contended that there were discrepancies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and that the testimony of the prosecutrix was unreliable. However, the Delhi High Court declined to examine those submissions in detail at the stage of bail.

“At the stage of consideration of bail, the evidence is not required to be minutely sifted or appreciated as would be done during trial,” Justice Sharmaa said, further noting that the trial was at an advanced stage and prosecution evidence was nearing completion.

Referring to a Supreme Court’s decision, the Delhi High Court observed that ordinarily, in serious offences such as rape and murder, courts should be “loath in entertaining bail applications” once the trial commences and witnesses start being examined.

“In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material placed on record, and the stage of the trial, this Court does not find any ground for grant of bail to the applicant,” it held while dismissing the bail plea.

However, considering that the accused has been in custody for over six years, Justice Sharma requested the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial at the earliest.

–IANS

pds/uk