SHILLONG, India, June 13 -- Meghalaya High Court issued the following judgment/order on May 12:

1. Heard Mr. R. War, learned counsel, who has submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 read with Section 31 of the POCSO Act, with a prayer for grant of bail on behalf of his elder brother, Shri Satab Ali, who is an accused, who was arrested on 27.05.2025 in connection with Khliehriat P.S. Case No. 25 (05) 2025 under Section 351 BNS read with Section 5(j)(ii)/5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act, now registered as Spl. POCSO Case No. 24/2025, before the Court of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat.

2. The learned counsel has submitted that the genesis of the case stems from an FIR lodged by the respondent No. 3/Complainant who, upon discovering that his paternal cousin, aged about 18 years old is pregnant from the accused brother of the petitioner, whom she alleged that he has forcibly had sexual intercourse with her three times between the months of January-February, 2025, the same which took place at the food stall belonging to the family of the victim/survivor located at Sookilo, and accordingly, necessary action as per law is requested to be taken.

3. As to the happenstance of the alleged forcible sexual act and the ultimate pregnancy of the victim/survivor, the learned counsel has submitted that the accused person has strongly denied that he has ever sexually assaulted her. Leading this Court to the statement of the survivor made before the police at the first instance, it was pointed out that she has stated that the said act was committed in the month of January, 2025. However, in her statement made before the Magistrate, made on 26.05.2025, she has stated that the incident happened on the third Sunday of March 2025. Again, in her deposition before the Court as PW-2, the survivor has stated that she does not remember the date, month and year when the incident happened, but in her cross-examination, she admitted that all the incidents took place in the month of January. Therefore, there was inconsistency in the statement of the survivor which will only strengthen the case of the accused, submits the learned counsel.

4. The learned counsel has also submitted that even the medical evidence does not support the prosecution's case, inasmuch as, on a bare calculation of the gestational age, the probable conception period would be in the month of February. This has been proved through the Early Pregnancy Scan Report issued by the Woodland WK Hospital, wherein on the basis of the test conducted on 29.04.2025, the findings/impression reads as "Single live intrauterine gestation corresponding to a gestational age of 9 Weeks 4 Days".

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=I1mmm2bl4r4EREhYK63Kv3VWHMWjXdY10O3C1GmT0LGsU1eris98E%2F3YL8Px4UhF&caseno=BA/15/2026&cCode=1&cino=MLHC010004542026&state_code=21&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.