Allowed

Dilbahar Toppo v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC20 Sept 2016MCRC/5592/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted regular bail to the applicant charged under Section 376 IPC. The court found the prosecutrix to be a major consenting party and treated the bail petition as fit for grant without detailed merit analysis, directing furnishing of a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; applicant directed to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety in like sum.

Dilbahar Toppo Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

Page No.1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.CR.C. No. 5592 of 2016

¶5

Dilbahar Toppo, S/o. Ram Lachchhu Toppo, aged about 26 years, Occupation- Service, R/o. Village- Vishunpur, Police Station – Sitapur, District – Surguja (C.G.)

¶6

----Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, Police Station – Darima, District – Surguja (C.G.)

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. J.K. Saxena, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Shobha Kashyap, Dy.Govt. Advocate

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

20/09/2016

¶14

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.79/2016, registered at Police Station – Darima, District – Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code.

¶15

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.05.2016 a report was made that the applicant on the pretext of marriage from September, 2015 committed sexual intercourse and also kept the prosecutrix certain time in his house and thereafter married to someone else. Thereby on the pretext of marriage, committed forceful intercourse.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecutrix was aged about 28 years and she was a consenting party. It is further submitted that the FIR has been grossly delayed and the applicant

¶17

Page No.2

¶18

has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that charge-sheet in this case has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 19.05.2016, therefore, the counsel prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶21

Perused the case diary and the statement of the prosecutrix, she appears to be major. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without any further observation on merits this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶23

It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for his appearance as and when directed.

¶24

Certified copy as per rules.

¶25

Sd/(Goutam Bhaduri) Judge

¶26

Balram

Dilbahar Toppo v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilbahar Toppo v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Jaiswal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Babbu Khan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shambhunath Gupta Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramnath Patel Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dullu Ram Netam Vs State Of Chhattisgarh