Rohit Kumar Jha And Other vs The State And Other

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Del) 996

ANU MALHOTRA
Rohit Kumar Jha And Other – Appellant
Versus
The State And Other – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. V. Govinda Ramanan, Advocate, for the Appellant; Ms. Asha Tiwari, APP for State with W/SI Athine, SV Rohit Kumar Jha, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Anu Malhotra, J. - The applicant, vide the present application seeks the grant of bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 in relation to FIR No.275/2021, PS Jafrabad under Sections 366/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 submitting to the effect that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case and that the relations between the applicant and the prosecutrix were wholly consensual. Inter alia it has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that no offence whatsoever in terms of the POCSO enactment is made out against the applicant, in as much as, the prosecutrix was a major as per her documents with her date of birth being 10.10.2002.

2. Inter alia it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the photographs of the prosecutrix which show the marriage between the prosecutrix and the applicant which have been placed on record reflect clearly the happy state of mind of the prosecutrix when she married the applicant and that the documents do not lie and clearly show that none of the alleged commission of the offences under Sections 366/376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 are made out in