IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Arun – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.24753 of 2021
Decided On : 06-01-2022
Consent - Age of Prosecutrix - The court granted bail to the applicant based on the totality of facts, including the statement of the prosecutrix and the discrepancy in her recorded date of birth, concluding that the applicant was entitled to bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for bail in connection with a case involving charges under various sections of the IPC and the POCSO act. The age of the prosecutrix was in dispute, with conflicting records of her date of birth.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted bail to the applicant, emphasizing the discrepancy in the recorded date of birth of the prosecutrix and the totality of facts, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Issues: Discrepancy in the age of the prosecutrix and the entitlement of the applicant for bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The discrepancy in the recorded date of birth of the prosecutrix and the totality of facts led the court to grant bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The applicant was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond, with the condition that the bail order would stand cancelled automatically if the applicant is found involved in any other case during the trial.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J. - This is first application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant in connection with Crime No.5/2021 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Dewas under Section 366, 363, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sec.5(L)/6 of POCSO act.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that from reading the statement of the prosecutrix u/S.164 Cr.P.C, it is clear that she was a consenting party. She has also married the present applicant. The date of birth recorded in aadhar Card is 5/10/2003 and she was major on the date of the incident.
Counsel for State submits that the age of the prosecutrix as per the school scholar register is 11/5/2006 and, therefore, she was minor on the date of the incident.
However, taking into consideration the totality of facts of the case and the statement of the prosecutrix and also the fact that in the aadhar Card the date of birth is recorded of year 2003 and the parents have also disclosed the different dates in their statements, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
It is directed that applicant arun shall be released from custody upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below.
The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance with the order passed by the Supreme Court IN RE : CONTaGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU "W.P. (C) No.1/2020" and ensure that the applicant is examined by the jail doctor before his release. If the applicant shows symptoms of COVID-19, the doctor shall forthwith direct him to be produced before the appropriate hospital designated for the detection and treatment of COVID-19 patients. If the doctor is of the opinion that the applicant is not affected with the virus, the jail authorities shall ensure his transportation from the jail till his place of residence.
It is further made clear that if it is found that the applicant is involved in any other case during the trial, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without reference to the Court and the Police will be at liberty to arrest the applicant.
A typed copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry to the office of the advocate General, on their email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned. The office is requested to forward a copy of this order to the learned Court below.
The discrepancy in the recorded date of birth of the prosecutrix and the totality of facts influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the applicant.
The court considered the prosecutrix's statement and age in granting bail, without expressing any view 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 absence of the applicant's name in the complainant's statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and in the FIR, and the length of time the applicant had been in custody, were key factors in ....
The court considered the maturity of the prosecutrix and the completion of the investigation as crucial factors in granting bail to the applicant.
The court may grant bail based on the duration of custody and the expected trial duration, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The completion of investigation, grant of bail to a co-accused under similar circumstances, and the allegations in the dying declaration are influential factors in the court's decision to grant bail.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the prosecutrix's statement supporting the applicant and her disclosure of her age as 20-21 years, despite the State's opposition based on the age reco....
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.