The court determined that a minor's voluntary elopement with the accused, coupled with no evidence of coercion, justified granting bail despite serious charges.

ORDER :

(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.306/2024 registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh, for offences under Sections 363, 366 & 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 of POCSO Act.

2. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of victim ‘R’ recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that sufficient material is available on record to indicate that the victim ‘R’ who is aged about 17 years on 27.04.2024 voluntarily eloped with the present petitioner who is aged about 17 years and 5 months and travelled with him to various places. Learned counsel further submitted that while the victim ‘R’ was in the company of the present petitioner, she had also worked as labourer with him on daily wages. Learned counsel submitted that despite having ample opportunities, she did not disclose the factum of she being abducted or subjected to forcible sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner, to anyone.

3. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation against the petitioner has already been completed. The petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial against him will take sufficiently long time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for indefinite period and thus, the petitioner deserve to be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that as per the challan papers submitted by the investigating agency, on 27.04.2024 the victim ‘R’ voluntarily eloped with the present petitioner and had also worked as a labourer on daily wages.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the victim ‘R’ had travelled with the petitioner to various places, however, despite having ample opportunities, she did not disclose the factum of she being abducted or subjected to forcible sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner, to anyone/ This Court also finds that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the victim or fleeing away from justice in case, he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Arshdeep Singh @ Arsh S/o Sukhjeet Singh shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.306/2024 registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.