SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 26663

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
VISHAL DHAGAT
Chand Ali – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 10334/2024



Advocates:
Kailash Dev Singh,Advocate General

An accused is entitled to bail after two years of incarceration, even for offences under the POCSO Act, if there is no chance that he will be able to influence the witness or tamper with evidence.

Headnote:

BAIL - POCSO ACT - SECTION 439 CRPC - MINOR PROSECUTRIX - BAIL GRANTED AFTER TWO YEARS OF INCARCERATION

Fact of the Case:

The applicant was arrested on 11.01.2022 for offences under Sections 363, 366, 120-B, 109, 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the IPC and Sections 5/6 r/w 17 of the POCSO Act. The prosecutrix was a minor and less than 16 years of age. She had specifically stated that the applicant had raped her.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the applicant had been in jail for more than two years. The prosecutrix had been examined in the Court and there was no chance that the applicant would be able to influence the witness or tamper with evidence.

Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail after two years of incarceration for offences under the POCSO Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant was entitled to bail as he had been in jail for more than two years and there was no chance that he would be able to influence the witness or tamper with evidence.

Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount.

ORDER

This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail who is in custody since 11.01.2022 relating to FIR No.250/2021 registered at Police Station Jawa District Rewa (M.P.) for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 120-B, 109, 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the IPC and Sections 5/6 r/w 17 of the POCSO Act.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant is in jail since 11.01.2022. He has falsely been implicated in the case. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Prosecutrix has been examined in the Court and now there is no chance that applicant will be able to influence the witness or tamper with evidence. Hence, he may be granted bail.

3. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for grant of bail. It is submitted that prosecutrix is minor and less than 16 years of age. She has specifically stated that applicant has rapped on her. Hence, he may not be granted bail. 4. Heard the counsel for the parties. 5. Applicant is in jail since last more than two years. Prosecutrix has been examined in the Court and now there is no chance that applicant will be able to influence the witness or tamper with evidence. Considering aforesaid facts of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, bail application filed by applicant is allowed.

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

7. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C. as under:- (a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter;

    (b) that such person shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected and;
    (c) that such person shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
    C.C. as per rules. (VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE pn Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE Signing time: 3/20/2024 3:47:21 PM

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top