Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SANJAY DWIVEDI
Jitendra Jhariya @ Jittu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
This first application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail relating to Crime No.376/2024 registered at Police Station- Thana Ghansaur, District- Seoni, for the offence under Sections 137 (2), 64, 64(2) (m), 238(b), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 , 4, 5(1), 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.12.2024. He submits that at the time of marriage or the alleged offence, the prosecutrix was minor, although she and the present applicant both have entered into marriage. He submits that in the statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has disclosed that the applicant has not committed any forceful act with her and whatever has been done, it was with her consent and wish, therefore, no case is made-out against the applicant. Upon these submissions, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.
4. Considering the facts an
The court granted bail based on the prosecutrix's consent and current status as the applicant's spouse, despite initial charges arising from her minority at the time of the alleged offence.
The court granted bail based on the prosecutrix's willingness and denial of forceful conduct, indicating that bail may be justified under disputed circumstances regarding consent.
The court determined that continued detention of the applicant was unnecessary due to lack of evidence and no criminal history, allowing bail with conditions.
The court granted bail considering the applicant's detention period and the completion of investigation despite the seriousness of the charges.
The court grants bail when evidence is insufficient to justify continued detention, emphasizing the lack of criminal antecedents and the completeness of the investigation.
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
