ITANAGAR, 19 Dec: The Gauhati High Court on 17 December set aside the anticipatory bail granted to Bameng MLA Goruk Pordung in connection with the alleged rape case registered at the Itanagar women police station (Case No 83/2019 u/s 376 (1)/354/506 IPC) on 13 October, 2019.
An FIR was lodged at the Itanagar women police station against the sitting MLA, alleging that he sexually molested a medical officer of the primary health centre in Bameng in East Kameng district.
A special bench, comprising Chief Justice (Acting) N Kotishwar Singh and Justice Mir Alfaz Ali revoked the anticipatory bail granted by the sessions judge of Papum Pare district on 28 October, 2019.
The progress was made after a special bench was constituted in obedience with the Supreme Court’s order for speedy disposal of criminal cases against sitting and former MLAs or MPs.
The matter has been remanded to the special bench session to consider the bail afresh on the merit of the materials submitted by the police in the chargesheet.
The victim-cum-petitioner had earlier in her revision petition termed the bail “inappropriate and hurriedly given, without considering the nature of the crime.”
The petitioner’s advocate, AM Bora had also submitted before the court that the legislator tried to influence the witnesses and exerted pressure on the petitioner and her husband to withdraw the case.
However, Pordung has denied the allegation made by the petitioner.
The BJP legislator from Bameng had allegedly raped a woman doctor in a city hotel here on 12 October, 2019. The woman had reportedly been sent to the hotel by her husband to collect the money he (the husband) had spent on Pordung’s election campaign.
The HC verdict came on Thursday, after hearing the case – Victim vs State of Arunachal Pradesh and MLA Goruk Pordung – on 4 December.
The HC order, a copy of which was made available to this reporter, reads: “The revision is directed against the order dated 28-10-2019 passed by the learned sessions judge, west sessions division, judge, Yupia, Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh in anticipatory bail application No 112/2019.
“The inevitable conclusion is that the grant of bail to the respondent by a non-speaking and non-reasoned order was not proper. Therefore, we set aside the order of the high court. The bail granted to Respondent 1 stands cancelled. Respondent 1 shall surrender to custody forthwith.
“Grant of bail, though being a discretionary order, calls for exercise of such a discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Order for bail benefit of any cogent reason cannot be sustained,” the court said.
“Keeping the aforesaid principle in mind, the impugned order being devoid of reasons is vitiated and cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside,” the order read.