Grant of regular bail is appropriate when the charge-sheet is filed, the case appears to be a result of a love affair, and the parties have settled, especially when the prosecutrix rescinds her statement before the trial court.

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.D. Moghariya appearing on behalf of the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. J.K. Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Dax K. Solanki appearing on behalf of respondent no.2. Learned advocate Mr. Solanki would submit that the complainant and the prosecutrix both are present in the Court and whereas he has identified them. Learned advocate tenders affidavits of the complainant and the prosecutrix. The same are ordered to be taken on record.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Chavda waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no.2.

3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11211050240608 of 2024 registered with Thangadh Police Station, Dist. Surendranagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 137(1)(b), 87, 64(2)(i)(m), 70(2), 351(2), 54 of the BNS and Section 5(L), 6, 3(a), 5(g), 16 and 17 of POCSO Act.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that since the charge-sheet is filed no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State and learned advocate for respondent no.2 have vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

i. While the age of the prosecutrix is stated to be around 18 years 3 months, the age of the present applicant being 22 years could not be ignored.

ii. Prima facie, it would appear that the present is a case of love affair between the parties.

iii. It also appears that the parties have settled the matter inter se and it also appears that the complainant and the prosecutrix in their depositions before the learned trial Court have rescinded from the statement given by them before the Investigating Officer.

iv. The fact of the present applicant being in custody since 20.10.2024 and the charge-sheet having been laid by the Investigating Officer. This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Information Report, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

8. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with F.I.R. registered as C.R. No. 11211050240608 of 2024 registered with Thangadh Police Station, Dist. Surendranagar, on executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the