Bail can be granted based on the applicant's age, profession, absence of criminal history, and the circumstances of the case, ensuring conditions to secure trial presence.

This first application has been filed by applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 315/2024 registered at Police Station Kannod District Dewas (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section (s) 363 , 366(a), 368 , 376(2)(n) , 376(3) of IPC & 5L read with section 6 of POCSO Act. The applicant is in judicial custody since 27.9.2024.

As per the case of prosecution, on 7.5.2024, Rajkumar enticed and taken minor victim aged around 14 years. Victim left her parental home and went with Rajkumar to Indore. They stayed in a rented premises for two months. Then father of Rajkumar took both of them to residence of Bhaiyalal, who happens to be maternal grand-father of Rajkumar. They stayed in the house of Bhaiyalal at Aavaliya for a month. On 25.9.2024, Rajkumar left her at the house of her maternal aunt at Tipras. P.S. Kannod registered FIR at crime No. 315/2024 initially for the offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC . Later, on the basis of statement of victim, prosecution for offence punishable under Sections 366-A , 376(2)(n) , 376(3) , 368 of IPC and Section 5L, 6 of POCSO Act were added. Applicant Bhaiyalal was arrested on 27.9.2024, he is in custody ever since. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted.

Learned Counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter for the reason that he is maternal grand-father of accused/Rajkumar. The applicant was not aware of the minority of victim. No offence as alleged is committed by the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that applicant is aged around 58 years. He is an agriculturist by profession. There is no likelihood of his absconsion leaving his family, home and profession. No criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant. There is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence by the applicant. The trial would take time to complete. Therefore, applicant may be extended the benefit of bail.

Per contra, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the arguments advanced by both the parties and overall circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is allowed.

Accordingly, it is directed that applicant-Bhaiyalal shall be released on bail in connection with Crime as stated in para-1 of this order, upon furnishing personal bond and surety bond of amount, as may be considered appropriate by the Trial Court/the Committal Court for compliance with conditions, as may be imposed by such Court to secure presence of the applicant for the trial under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C ., 1973/Section 480(3) of BNSS, 2023 .

This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of breach of any of the preconditions of bail, the concerned Court may consider, on merit, cancellation of bail without any impediment of this order. The concerned trial court shall get the conditions reproduced on the personal bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of the them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he had explained the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.

C.C. as per rules.

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE BDJ Signed by: BHUNESHWAR