SHC dismisses bail plea of school van driver in child molestation case

The Sindh High Court on Thursday dismissed the bail application of a school van driver in a child molestation case and directed the trial court to ensure privacy and comfort of the child during the trial proceedings.

Syed Saad Ahmed was arrested by the Taimoria police for allegedly molesting the child. According to the prosecution, the applicant was a van driver who allegedly molested the four-year-old victim while picking and dropping her at school.

The applicant’s counsel submitted that the FIR of the case was registered after a year and he did not sexually abuse the child, but he would at times discipline her, give her a light slap and twist her ears.

He submitted that the victim and the complainant were not telling the truth, for if the child was being abused why his pick and drop services were continued by the parents. He said the applicant is also a father of daughters and cannot even think of abusing a child.

A single bench headed by Justice Omar Sial, after hearing the arguments of the counsel, observed that the counsel’s argument that the applicant would act only rough to discipline the child was tantamount to trivialising the child abuse.

The court observed that bruises on various parts of the child, including her thighs, coupled with reports from her school that the child was not all right should have raised the red flag for the parents of the child. The court observed that the parents were at fault for not realizing soon enough the trauma their child was going through, and as a consequence the abuse continued unabted for nearly one year.

It further said that it did not find any reason for the child to lie about the trauma inflicted upon her by the applicant. The court observed that applicant is a school van driver and he should be kept away from the children during the pendency of the trial. It then dismissed the bail application.

Regarding recording the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the CrPC, the court observed that if the investigation officer believes that the recording of the statement is essential, the court will not interfere in the investigation process; however, the trial court is required to ensure privacy and comfort of the child during the trial proceedings.