IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Bharat @ Bhaarat – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 11013 of 2023
Decided On : 13-03-2023
Bail - Rape - Prosecutrix's Statement - Age of Prosecutrix
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for bail in connection with a case of abduction and rape of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix, in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., stated that she had willingly gone with the applicant to different places and was a consenting party.
Finding of the Court:
After considering the prosecutrix's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the fact that the prosecutrix was nearing 18 years, the court granted bail to the applicant without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Issues: The age of the prosecutrix and the voluntariness of her actions were key issues in the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the prosecutrix's statement and her age in granting bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The applicant was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond, with conditions related to COVID-19 precautions and a warning that the bail order would stand cancelled 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. 495/2022 registered at Police Station â' Maksi, Dist. Shajapur (M.P.) under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC.
2. It is alleged that the applicant has abducted and committed rape with the prosecutrix. Counsel for the applicant submits that a missing report was lodged by mother of the prosecutrix and she was recovered on 22.12.2022. Counsel submits that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has stated that she had herself willingly gone with the applicant to different places. She was a consenting party.
3. Counsel for the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail on the ground that the age of the prosecutrix was less than 18 years on the date of the incident.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the fact that the age of the prosecutrix is more than 17 years 11 months nearing 18 years, the charge-sheet has been filed, the investigation is completed and no further custodial interrogation is required, 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.
5. It is directed that applicant 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 Ld. Court below.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. A typed copy of this order is being forwarded 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 Ld. Court below.
The court considered the prosecutrix's statement and age in granting bail, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
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 solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix were considered as grounds for granting bail.
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 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 has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
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 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 completion of investigation, filing of chargesheet, and the lack of criminal antecedents are key considerations in granting bail.
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.
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.