Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DEEPAK KUMAR TIWARI, J.
Shubham Rao S/o Shyam Singh Rao – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
MCRC No. 5065 of 2023
Decided on : 19-07-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 363, 366 (a), 376 & 376 (2) (n) - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 439 - Offence of Rape – Kidnapping – Appeal against Conviction - Held, applicant is innocent and he has falsely implicated in crime in question - He further submits that prosecutrix and applicant have peacefully married to each other and on date of marriage prosecutrix was major - He also submits that prosecutrix has been examined before trial Court and she has not supported case of prosecution and clearly stated that she want to live with husband and not want any action against applicant - Due to family pressure further, false FIR has been lodged against applicant - Submission of learned counsel for parties and considering facts and circumstances of case, considering nature of allegation, statement of prosecutrix, considering period of pretrial detention of applicant, without commenting anything on merits of case, Court inclined to applicant on bail - Application is allowed
ORDER :
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail has been filed by the accused/applicant who has been arrested on 07.05.2023 in connection with Crime No.28/2022 registered at Police Station Jamgaon (R), Durg for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 (a), 376 & 376 (2) (n) of the IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
2. Allegation against the accused/applicant is that, he abducted the minor prosecutrix from the lawful guardianship and committed rape with her several times, due to which, she got pregnant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that prosecutrix and applicant have peacefully married to each other 15.08.2022 and on the date of marriage the prosecutrix was major. He also submits that prosecutrix has been examined before the trial Court and she has not supported the case of the prosecution and clearly stated that she want to live with the husband and not want any action against the applicant. However, due to family pressure, false FIR has been lodged against the applicant. Even during the hearing of bail application before the Court below prosecutrix did not raised any objection however, her mother has raised objection for granting bail. He also submits that the applicant is languishing in jail and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time. He also submits that the applicant would abide by all terms and conditions imposed on him while granting bail. Therefore, he may be released on bail.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submission. However, she does not dispute the contention in respect of the prosecutrix’ statement.
5. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the nature of allegation, statement of the prosecutrix, further considering the period of pretrial detention of the applicant, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
6. Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that on applicant’s furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he shall be released on bail, on the following conditions:-
(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,
(c) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.
The court considered the consent of the prosecutrix and her father, the solemnization of marriage between the applicant and the prosecutrix, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the tria....
The court may grant bail based on factors such as lack of support from the victim, the age of the victim, and the likelihood of the trial taking time.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the material presented and overall consideration of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix were considered as grounds for granting bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of lack of evidence, prolonged trial process, and the initial non-implication of the accused by the prosecutrix in granting bail ....
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court considered the minor status of the prosecutrix and her voluntary actions in denying bail to the applicant.
The court may grant bail based on the nature of the allegation, the role of the accused, the absence of a criminal past, and the expected duration of the trial process.
The court considered the evidence relating to the age of the prosecutrix, delayed FIR, and the age of the applicant in granting bail, emphasizing the importance of these factors in bail decisions for....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
