Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 374 (CHH)

Pinku v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2014-10-29

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA

body2014
ORDER Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. 1. Heard. The applicant has moved this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 123/2014 registered at Police Station Gidhori Police Station (Police Chowki Girodhpuri), District Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara for the offence punishable under Section 376, 363, 506-B of IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1)(XII) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The applicant has been arrested on 30-07-2014. 2. Case of the prosecution is that the applicant kidnapped the prosecutrix, stated to be 17 years of age and committed rape on her. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the circumstances of the case, particularly the statement of the prosecutrix, delay of four months in lodging FIR and the statement of mother and father of the prosecutrix would prima facie reveal that the prosecutrix and the applicant had longstanding affair and it was only compulsion of the father, report has been lodged. Even according to the prosecutrix, alleged incident between the prosecutrix and the applicant had taken place four months before the date of lodging FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution has come out with a report of the Doctor which also does not favour the State, as the Doctor has opined the age of the prosecutrix more than 16 years with a relaxation up to two years, therefore, in these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to bail, 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer by submitting that even though, there is no conclusive evidence as per the report of the Doctor, age of the girl stated to be around 16 years and the girl has stated that the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her by giving threat, therefore, prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 5. 5. Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration that the alleged incident had taken place prior to four months of lodging of FIR and further taking into consideration the statement of mother and father of the prosecutrix, who have stated regarding the incident having been taken place 8 to 9 days before the date of lodging of FIR, conversation with Jawahar and the conduct of the prosecutrix and also taking into consideration that the prosecution has not come out with any clinching material with regard to age of the prosecutrix and the Doctor himself has stated the age of the prosecutrix is more than 16 years with a relaxation up to two years and the fact that investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 30-07-2014, the application is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- along with two local solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted.