Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J.
Deepak – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 61771 of 2022
Decided On : 29-12-2022
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the applicant who was arrested for offences under IPC and POCSO Act, considering the solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix, and the statements of the prosecutrix and her mother recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for abduction and repeated rape of a minor prosecutrix. The applicant claimed that the prosecutrix voluntarily went with him, they solemnized marriage, and have a child together.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted bail to the applicant, considering the solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix, and the statements of the prosecutrix and her mother recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant deserved to be granted bail despite the serious charges against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix, and the statements of the prosecutrix and her mother recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. as grounds for granting bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application and directed the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety.
JUDGMENT
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J. - This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the applicant as he has been arrested on 28.10.2022 in connection with Crime No.252/2021 registered at Police Station Bhanpura, District Mandsaur (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (n), 376(3) of IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 and 5(j)/6 of POCSO Act.
2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 09.10.2022 applicant abducted a minor prosecutrix, aged about 15-16 years and thereafter committed rape upon her repeatedly.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution has failed to produce any document with regard to the age of the prosecutrix. The school Scholar Register entry produced on record is of 8th standard. Prosecutrix in her statement recorded during investigation under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has admitted that she voluntarily went with the applicant and they have solemnized marriage. They have blessed with a baby girl also and has lived together. Prosecutrix's mother also stated so. No offence is made out against the applicant. His custodial trial is not required. Therefore, he be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer. Having considered the rival submissions, material produced on record and the fact that the applicant and the prosecutrix both are solemnized marriage and are living together and considering the statements of the prosecutrix and her mother recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.and also considering the overall material produced on record, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, hence, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
5. It is directed that the applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Trial Court during the pendency of trial. It is further directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C.
6. This application is allowed and stands disposed of.
7. Certified copy, as per Rules.
The solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix were considered as grounds for granting bail.
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....
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 age of the prosecutrix, her statements, and the delayed FIR were crucial factors in the Court's decision to grant bail to the applicant.
The delay in filing the FIR and the nature of allegations can be considered in granting bail for serious offences.
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 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 decision to grant bail was based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the delayed FIR and the likelihood of a long trial.
The delay in lodging the FIR and the age of the prosecutrix at the time of the incident were crucial factors in the court's decision to grant bail to the applicant.
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
