Chattisgarh High Court
Rajesh @ Raju Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 January, 2024
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 39 of 2024
• Rajesh @ Raju Kumar S/o Late Sahdev Ram Aged About 26 Years,
Caste- Gond, R/o Village- Nawadih, Police Station- Pratappur,
District - Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.
------Applicants
VERSUS
• State Of Chhattisgarh through - The Station House Officer,
Police Station - Pratappur, District - Surajpur (C.G.).
-------Non-applicants
For applicants : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate
For Non-applicants-State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER
18/01/2024
1. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2023 registered at Police Station - Pratappur, District - Surajpur, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366A, 323, 376 (D) of I.P.C. 1860 and under Section 4 & 6 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012.
2. Case of the prosecution is that, on 18.01.2023, when the victim from the place of dance programme went to handpump near her school for drinking water, at that time, 8 to 10 boys came there. Some boys have caught hold of her brother and took her to nearby place and started assaulting her brother and remaining boys took the victim in the forest and have committed forceful sexual inercourse with her one by one. Report was lodged in the concerned police station. Based on the report, applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested.
2
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and he has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that during trial, victim has been examined before the Trial Court and she has not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that he made a statement that some other persons have committed forceful sexual intercourse with her. He submits that the victim could not identify any of the person due to night and no identification parade was conducted before her. Applicant is in jail since 19.01.2023. Therefore, he may be enlarged on regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that serious allegations are leveled against the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. She further submits that test identification parade was conducted in which, the victim had identified the applicant. However, she submits that the evidence of the victim is subject matter of appreciation by the Trial Court.
5. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim along with her father is present before this Court through virtual mode from D.L.S.A. Surajpur, District - Surajpur and they have raised no objection in grant of bail to the applicant.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
7. Taking in consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of counsel for the applicant based on the deposition of the victim, as also the submission of the father of the victim, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on 3 his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to satisfaction of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that:
(i) He shall appear before the Trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance.
(ii) He shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) If applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.
9. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey