ORDER :

1. Present appellant has filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 134 of 2021 before the court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Limkheda, Dist: Dahod u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 requesting to enlarge him on regular bail on account of offence being C.R. No. I/72/2019 of 2020 registered with Dharpur Police Station, Dahod for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 504, 376(N)c(3) of Indian Penal Code and section 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children Sexual Harassment Act 2012 and Section 3(1)(w), 3(2)(5-a) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989 (for short “the Atrocities Act”) wherein the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Limkheda, Dist: Dahod rejected the said application on 05.04.2021.

2. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, appellant has preferred this appeal u/s 14A of the Atrocities Act.

3. Heard learned advocate for the appellant and learned APP for the respondent-State.

4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the present appellant is wrongly involved in the offence by the Investigating Agency. That, the appellant is absolutely innocent person and has not committed any offences whatsoever much less offences as enumerated in the FIR. That, as per the adhar card the victim was major and they got married as per their rites and customs but the complainant wants to sell the victim somewhere else and therefore, they had shown victim as minor. That, there is contradiction in statement of complainant and no procedure was followed for taking serology report. That, there is no birth registration of victim and there is contradiction in date of birth of victim. That, there is no signature of concerned officer while registration of date of birth in record and therefore, it seems doubtful. That, the victim was eloped with the appellant by her own will and wish, and therefore, ingredients of Section 363 and 366 of IPC are not attracted. Hence, it was requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and release the present appellant on regular bail.

5. Learned APP for the respondent-State has strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant and submitted that learned trial court has rightly dismissed the prayer for granting bail to the present appellant as the victim was having minor age of 14 years and 8 months. Referring different certificates, which is part of the charge sheet, it is submitted that birth date of the victim as per certificate issued by the Anganwadi worker is 01.01.2005 and as per certificate issued by Talati cum Mantri, date of birth of the victim is mentioned as 07.01.2007. It was further submitted that consent, if any, on the part of the victim cannot be considered in the present case. It was further submitted that the age of the victim was 14 years and 8 months at the time of committing the offence by the present appellant and the complaint of the alleged offence was registered on 30th September 2019. It was further submitted that however charge sheet is filed, appellant cannot be released on bail as prima facie involvement of the present appellant has been proved by the prosecution. Hence, it was requested by learned APP for the respondent-State to dismiss the present appeal.

6. Present appeal was admitted by this Court on 03.05.2021 and this appeal was fixed on 09.06.2021. On 09.06.2021, in the interest of justice, fresh notice of admission was issued to the respondent no.2 making it returnable on 15.07.2021 through concerned police station and thereafter, this appeal was listed on 17.08.2021; 18.10.2021 and today itself. Today, though called out, none was present for and on behalf of the respondent no.2. Thus, no argument was advanced for and on behalf of the original complainant-respondent no.2

7. Having considered the facts of the case, submissions made