Back
2021 Supreme(Chh) 54
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.
Chudamani Alias Chudaman Sahu S/o Tukaram Sahu - Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
MCRC No. 3614 of 2021
Decided on : 11-06-2021
Important Points
Subject
Bail Application - Second Bail Application
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.376
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT : S.4
Headnote
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376 - POCSO Act - Section 4 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 439 - Rape/Sexual abuse - - Minor girl - Second bail application - Rejection first application with liberty to revive the prayer for grant of bail after examination of the prosecutrix
Finding of the Court: Prosecutrix has got married to another person and is not residing in the village, therefore, she is not turning up for recording her statement - Nature of liberty reserved in favour of the applicant it is difficult to consider the prayer unless the prosecutrix is examined or some evidence is brought on record that she is not traceable - Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant
Result: Second bail application dismissed
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri N. Naha Roy, Advocate
For the Respondent: Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Dy. Adv. General
ORDER :
1. Heard.
2. The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 of CrPC, as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.64/2019, registered at Police Station Aarang, District Raipur (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
3. By order dated 4-9-2020 passed in MCRC No.1762 of 2020 the first bail application was dismissed on merits. However, liberty was reserved in favour of the applicant to revive the prayer for grant of bail after examination of the prosecutrix.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the prosecutrix has got married to another person and is not residing in the village, therefore, she is not turning up for recording her statement.
5. In view of the nature of liberty reserved in favour of the applicant it is difficult to consider the prayer unless the prosecutrix is examined or some evidence is brought on record that she is not traceable.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
7. Accordingly, the second bail application is rejected. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the applicant to revive the prayer for grant of bail after examination of the prosecutrix and/or her parents.
