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 trial as grounds for granting bail.

JUDGMENT

Anil Verma, J. - Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Crime No. 798/2022 registered at P.S - Agar, District- Agar Malwa (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(2) (n), 376(2)(h), 376(2)(k) of IPC and sections 3/ 4(2), 5(l) / 6, 5(j)(ii) of POCSO Act.

2. As per prosecution story,on 26/11/2022, father of the prosecutrix lodged FIR at police station - Agar, District - Agar Malwa by stating that her minor daughter / prosecutrix is missing from hom. During investigation, the prosecutrix was recovered and it has been gathered that present applicant abducted the prosecutrix and took her with him at different places and repeatedly committed rape upon her, due to which, she became pregnant. Accordingly, the aforementioned offence was registered and he was arrested.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. There is no legal evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the aforementioned offence. Prosecutrix and present applicant solemnized marriage with their own consent and the consent of their families. The prosecutrix herself and her father filed affidavit by stating that at the time of the incident, the prosecutrix was major and they have no objection, if the applicant is granted bail. Applicant is in custody since 17/01/2023 He is permanent resident of District- Bulandshahar (UP). There is no apprehension of his fleeing away from the court of justice. Final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

4. Per-contra, learned PL for respondent - State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection stating that as per the scholar register, the prosecutrix was minor at the time of the incident and she became pregnant, therefore, he does not deserve for bail.

5. Learned counsel for the objector submitted that the prosecutrix and her father have also filed affidavit stating that they have no objection, if the applicant is released on bail.

6. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case dairy.

7. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature of allegation as also taking note of the fact that prosecutrix and her father filed affidavit stating that they have no objection regarding granting bail to the applicant; it is also submitted that the marriage of the prosecutrix has been solemnized with present applicant and possibility of delay in conclusion of the trial cannot be ruled out, in view of the evidence available on record, I deem it proper to release the accused / applicants on bail.

8. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties ( out of which, one locak surety) in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required.

9. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.,

10. Certified copy, as per Rules.