Allowed

Ali Ahmad v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Jul 2019MCRC/2354/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted regular bail to the applicant in a POCSO and IPC case involving kidnapping and sexual exploitation of a minor. The bail was allowed due to the prosecution witnesses turning hostile and failing to support the prosecution case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on regular bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Ali Ahmad Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.CR.C. No. 2354 of 2019

¶5

Ali Ahmad, S/o. Late Ameer Vax, Aged About 24 Years, R/o. Tripureshwarpur (Dagmala), Police Station- Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Station House Officer, Police Station Ramnujnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Lav Sharma, P.L.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

08/07/2019

¶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.09/2019, registered at Police Station –Ramanujnagar, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376 (3) of Indian Penal Code & Section 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶15

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The prosecutrix, her parents and other witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and none of the witnesses have supported the prosecution case. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be granted regular bail.

¶16

¶17

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and the submissions made in this respect.

¶18

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

¶19

According to the prosecution case, the applicant abducted the minor prosecutrix and then keeping her in confinement, he has exploited her sexually. Hence, this case.

¶20

Considered on the submissions made and the contents of the case diary. On perusal of the certified copy of the deposition of the prosecutrix herself, her parents and other witnesses that are filed along with the bail application, it appears that all the witnesses have turned hostile and not at all supported the prosecution case, therefore, looking to this development in the trial against the applicant, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

¶21

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

¶22

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 in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for his appearance as and when directed.

¶23

Certified copy as per rules.

¶24

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

¶25

Balram

Ali Ahmad v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Ahmad v. the 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

Deepak Garg Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ranjeet @ Ranjeet Darvesh & Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Atul Kumar Shrivastava Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhupesh Chandrawanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemlal Banjara Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramlabai and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh