Meghalaya High Court grants bail to man accused of raping his mother

The Meghalaya High Court recently granted bail to a man accused of raping his mother, stating that when it comes to bail applications, it is well-settled that courts should resort to “bail and not jail” (Pyrshangbor Myrthong vs. State of Meghalaya)..Justice W Diengdoh was hearing a case where the accused was said to have been caught in the act of rape after he was allegedly seen by his nieces lying on top of his mother who was asleep..The counsel for the petitioner argued that the statements of the eye-witnesses were contrary, and the complainant herself had filed a bail application before the Magistrate where she categorically stated that no offence was committed by the accused. In fact, even the medical report did not show evidence of a sexual assault.Further, it was submitted that the case had been charge-sheeted and was before the Sessions Court for consideration of the charges. The counsel sought bail for the accused while bringing the Court's attention to the fact that he had been in custody for the last 19 months..To the contrary, the Senior Public Prosecutor argued that a prima facie case had been made out against the accused based on the eye-witnesses, therefore, it would not be proper for the Court to enlarge the accused on bail..As the victim in her statement, said she could not definitively say that she was raped by the accused and retracted her statement in the bail application, the Court did not find that she would pursue the matter in earnest.The judge relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra vs Central Bureau of Investigation where it held that “the object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon.”.Relying on the medical examination and that the investigation had been completed, Justice Diengdoh held that the accused must be granted bail..Advocate S Nongsiej appeared for the petitioner. The respondent was represented by Additional Senior Public Prosecutors S Sengupta and H Kharmih along with Government Advocates H Abraham and AH Kharwanlang..[Read Order]