Allowed

Tarzen Chouhan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Sept 2019MCRC/3237/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chhattisgarh High Court allowed a regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a rape depiction act under Sections 376(2)(n) IPC. The judge relied on the accused's claim and the prosecutory's age and willingness to accompany, permitting release on personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail allowed; applicant directed to be released on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety.

Tarzen Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C. No. 3237 of 2019

¶5

Tarzen Chouhan S/o Bodh Ram Chouhan Aged About 25 Years Caste Gada, R/o Village Katekoni, Police Station And Tahsil Sarangarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, At Present R/o Manapsar, Police Station Sarsiwan Tahsil Bilaigarh District Balodabazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station Sarsiwan, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Roop Nayak, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Neeraj Pradhan, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board

¶12

23-09-2019

¶13

Heard on the application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 16.03.2019 in connection with Crime No.101/2019, registered at Police Station– Sarsiwan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh for offence punishable under Sections 376(2)( n ) of I.P.C.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has not committed any offence. The prosecutrix is aged about 20 years and she had been a consenting party while she went along with the applicant to different places and never raised any alarm. Therefore, prayed that application be allowed.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application and submits that prosecutrix has clearly stated that this applicant has forcefully committed rape with her. Therefore, prayed that application be

¶16

-2-

¶17

rejected.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶19

According to the prosecution case, this applicant on pretext that he will marry the prosecutrix took her to different places and established physical relation with her without her consent and willingness.

¶20

Considering that the prosecutrix is a major girl and she willingly accompanied the applicant to different places, therefore, I feel inclined to allow this application.

¶21

Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the 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 Court, for his appearance as and when directed.

¶22

Certified copy as per rules.

¶23

Monika

¶24

Sd/(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

Tarzen Chouhan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarzen Chouhan 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

Shailesh Gupta Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Pavan Ajabrao Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajwant Bharti & Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rishi Kumar Rautiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Kumar Sen (Nai) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Kumar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh