THE COURT MAY GRANT BAIL TO AN ACCUSED PERSON IF THE COURT IS SATISFIED THAT THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED IS NOT GUILTY OF THE OFFENCE AND THAT THE ACCUSED IS NOT LIKELY TO COMMIT ANY OFFENCE WHILE ON BAIL.

Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 439 CRPC - DELAY IN FIR - CONSENT - AGE OF ACCUSED - HELD THAT THE APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO BE RELEASED ON BAIL.
Fact of the Case:

THE APPLICANT WAS ARRESTED IN CONNECTION WITH AN INCIDENT DATED 20.10.2023, AND AN FIR WAS LODGED ON 1.11.2023. THE APPLICANT FILED A BAIL APPLICATION, CONTENDING THAT THE FIR WAS FALSE AND FABRICATED, AND THAT THE DNA REPORT WAS OF NO SUBSTANCE. THE PROSECUTION OPPOSED THE BAIL APPLICATION, SUBMITTING THAT THE APPLICANT WAS NOT ENTITLED TO BAIL IN LIGHT OF THE DIRECT ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM.
Finding of the Court:

THE COURT NOTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN LODGING THE FIR, AND THAT THE APPLICANT WAS AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS AND HAD BEEN IN CUSTODY SINCE 1.12.2023. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE PROSECUTRIX WAS A MAJOR AND THAT THE APPLICANT AND THE PROSECUTRIX WERE RELATIVES.
Issues: WHETHER THE APPLICANT WAS ENTITLED TO BAIL.
Ratio Decidendi: THE COURT HELD THAT THE APPLICANT WAS ENTITLED TO BAIL, CONSIDERING THE DELAY IN LODGING THE FIR, THE AGE OF THE APPLICANT, AND THE FACT THAT THE PROSECUTRIX WAS A MAJOR AND THAT THE APPLICANT AND THE PROSECUTRIX WERE RELATIVES.
Final Decision: THE COURT ALLOWED THE BAIL APPLICATION AND DIRECTED THAT THE APPLICANT BE RELEASED ON BAIL ON FURNISHING A PERSONAL BOND IN THE SUM OF RS.50,000/- (RUPEES FIFTY THOUSAND ONLY) WITH ONE SOLVENT SURETY IN THE LIKE AMOUNT.

ORDER

This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to FIR/Crime No.959/2023 dated 01.11.2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Panna for the offences under Sections 457, 376, 376 (2) (h), 376 (2) (Ch) & 506 of IPC.

2. Counsel for the applicant submits that in the present case, in connection with an incident dated 20.20.2023, the first information report has been lodged on 1.11.2023. It is contended by the counsel that if the F.I.R is subjected to scrutiny the same would reveal that a false and fabricated case has been registered against the applicant. It is also contended by the counsel that the D.N.A report is also of no substance inasmuch as the clothing which were worn by the victim at the time of incident was subsequently changed and washed. Therefore, the D.N.A report is of no value. It is also contended by the counsel that as per the allegations leveled by the prosecution it is a case of consent apparently. It is also not in dispute that the prosecutrix is major and they are relative, therefore, submits that the applicant who is in custody since 1.12.2023 be enlarged on bail. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and submitted that taking into consideration the direct allegation against the applicant, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

4. Heard the submissions and perused the case diary. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of record it reflects that detailing the incidents dated 20.10.2023 and also 31.10.2023, the F.I.R was lodged on 1.11.2023. Prima facie, the explanation as regards the delay in lodging the F.I.R is not available in the record. Therefore, taking into consideration the factum of delay in lodging the F.I.R and also the fact that the applicant is aged about 25 years and is in custody since 1.12.2023, this Court deem it proper to allow this application. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

6. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during the pendency of trial.

8. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. 9. Accordingly, this M.Cr.C. stands disposed of. (MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE vivek JUDGE vivek

Click Here to Read the rest of this document