Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Bhupendra Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 June, 2021

Author: Nandita Dubey

Bench: Nandita Dubey

                                                                       1                            MCRC-5882-2021
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                      MCRC-5882-2021
                                               (BHUPENDRA SAHU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 11-06-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                          Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the applicant.
                                          Shri Amit Bhurrak, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Dehat Hoshangabad, District Hoshangabad in connection with Crime No.409/2020 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) of IPC and Section 5 and 6 of POCSO Act. He is in custody since 04.12.2020.

As per the prosecution, a missing person report was lodged on 07.9.2020 by the father of the minor stating that her daughter who is 16 years of age went missing from the home. The prosecutrix was recovered later on from the possession of the present applicant. In 164 statement, the proxecutrix has mentioned that she has a love affair with the present applicant and went with him on her own accord and got married in a temple and started living with him as husband and wife.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the prosecutrix is minor but she went along with the present applicant as per her own wish with an intention to get married and to live thereafter along with him. It is stated that the prosecutrix has not alleged the applicant of having forged her into the marriage or having physical relationship with her. Under the circumstances, the applicant be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has opposed the bail application. It is stated that the prosecutrix is minor, i.e., 16 years of age and in such cases consent does not matter. He has not disputed the 164 statement Signature Not Verified SAN of the prosecutrix.

2 MCRC-5882-2021 Considering the 164 statement of the prosecutrix and the fact that this is a case of adolescent love affair and looking to the tender age of the applicant, i.e., 19 years of age, without adverting to the merits of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by himself;

2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The learned concerned Magistrate and the prosecution are directed to ensure following of Covid-19 precautionary protocol prescribed from time to time by the Supreme Court, the Central Govt. and as well as the State Govt.

A typed copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry to the Office Digitally signed by ASHISH KOSHTA Date: 2021.06.11 17:04:27 IST 3 MCRC-5882-2021 of the Advocate General and to the concerned learned Panel Lawyer, on their respective email address for intimation to the Police Station concerned. The office is requested to forward a copy of this order to the learned Court below also.

Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.

(NANDITA DUBEY) JUDGE ak Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by ASHISH KOSHTA Date: 2021.06.11 17:04:27 IST