Taking note of the seriousness of the offence and the fact that witnesses in the case are yet to be examined, Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal refused to grant any relief to the accused, who is in jail since October 26, 2014 when he was arrested.
The court also noted that the girl with special needs, who was 15-years-old at the time of the incident, had in her statement before the magistrate attributed a specific role to the accused and had also identified him correctly.
It also said that the girl had specifically stated that the accused had sexually assaulted her which made him liable to be prosecuted under The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
"There is apprehension of influencing the witnesses. I am not inclined to grant bail to the accused/petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the application is dismissed," the judge said.
The accused, in his bail plea, had contended that the FIR was ante-dated and ante-timed and that he was being made a scapegoat.
The police opposed the plea saying that the accused deserved no leniency as the nature of offence was "heinous and grave" as the victim was a child with special needs.
According to the complaint lodged by the girl's parents, she had gone to the hospital with her father on October 24, 2016, to obtain her handicap certificate.
When the father left to meet the doctor to show the documents needed for the certificate, the accused had sexually assaulted the girl who was sitting alone in a room there, the complaint alleged.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)