Back
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Atul Sreedharan, J
Aom Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the alleged offenses and context of anticipatory bail. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's interpretation of sexual contact under pocso and ipc. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. final decision allowing bail under specified conditions. (Para 11 , 12) |
2 Jabalpur: 15/02/2021 Mr. Madan Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant in M.Cr.C. No.
6849/2021.
Mr. Sharad Verma, Ld. Counsel for the applicants in M.Cr.C. No.
8408/2021.
Mr. Jasneet Singh Hora, Ld. Panel Lawyer for the State. With consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. For the sake of brevity, the facts stated in M.Cr.C. No.6849/2021 are being taken into consideration for deciding both these anticipatory bail applications, as both the cases arises out from the same crime number registered at the same Police Station for the same offences.
2. The applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.52/2021 for offences punishable under sections 452, 354, 354-A, 354-D, 294, 506/34 of the I.P.C. as also U/s.7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “POCSO”), registered at Police Station-
Kotwali, District-Damoh.
3. The applicants are seeking ant
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
