Four boys were apprehended in Assam’s Kokrajhar district for allegedly raping a minor girl and threatening to kill her if she revealed anything, police said on Friday night.
Shared the information on social media, director general of Assam Police Gyanendra Pratap Singh said the mother of the victim had lodged a complaint about the two-month-old incident at Salakati Outpost on Friday afternoon.
“Her minor daughter was gang-raped by four persons around two months back at around 3pm on the bank of river Champa while she went to take a bath. She was threatened not to disclose the matter to anyone by the four accused. (But) She disclosed the incident today to her mother,” the DGP said.
The top cop added that after receiving the complaint, police started investigating the matter and identified the accused.
“All four accused have been identified and arrested. They are all reported to be children in conflict with Law (CCL). The age etc is being verified and further lawful action is being taken,” Singh tweeted.
Since the accused persons are also minors, police said that their identities are being kept secret, Singh added.
As per some of the recent judgments of various high courts in the country, the Children in Conflict with Law (CCL) cannot be treated as undertrial prisoners and the benefit of bail cannot be denied as well.
The Madhya Pradesh high court in March last year said, “Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) cannot be treated as an undertrial prisoner as contemplated under Section 436-A CrPC. Since the arrest, confinement or apprehension are not contemplated in Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.”
A bench of Punjab and Haryana high court this year said when a juvenile is tried as an adult in case of allegation of a heinous crime, the benefit of bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act cannot be denied to him.
“No doubt, the appellant/CCL was directed to be tried like an adult, but still they remain a juvenile in conflict with the law and can never be denied the benefit of Section 12 of the Act,” the special bench wrote in its order.
The court also stated that if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into the association with any known criminal or expose the person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person release would defeat the ends of justice.