Allowed

Shiv Kumar Rajwade v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Aug 2021MCRC/4207/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur disposed of a bail application by Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant. Granting bail to the applicant accused of offences under IPC and POCSO, the Court directed release on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety.

What did the court decide?

The bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC is allowed; applicant is directed to be released on furnishing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- with one surety.

Shiv Kumar Rajwade Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 4207 of 2021

¶4

Shiv Kumar Rajwade, S/o Hulas Rajwade, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Maheshpur, Police-Station-Jainagar, Tahsil Surajpur, DistrictSurajpur Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Outpost Latori, Police Of Police Station Jainagar, District-Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

For Applicant : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate. For State/respondent : Mrs. Hamida Siddiqui, Dy. Adv. General.

¶10

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

¶11

10/08/2021

¶12

Heard.

¶13

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail to him as he is in custody in connection with Crime No.301/2020 registered at Police-Station- Outpost Latori, P.S.-Jainagar, DistrictSurajpur(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 366, 376(2) (<), 323, 376/109, 450 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections 4, 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonhi Pratadana Nivaran Adhiniyam, 2005.

¶14

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant, that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in jail since

¶15

¶16

11.12.2020. The prosecutrix was not minor on the date of incident and, further, there had been consensual relationship of the applicant with the prosecutrix, which is reflected from her statement under Section 161 & 164 CrPC. Only for the reason that the prosecutrix was driven out from the house of the applicant after she was alleged to be sorcerer, the FIR has been lodged, which is totally false, therefore, it is prayed that this applicant may be enlarged on regular bail.

¶17

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and the submission made in this respect. It is submitted that the prosecutrix was minor on the date when the affair between applicant and prosecutrix was started, therefore, her willingness and consent is immaterial. Further, looking to the other statement present against the applicant, this application may be rejected.

¶18

The prosecutrix had virtually appeared before this Court through the 'Help Desk' of DLSA, Surajpur on 28.07.2021. She had stated that she has objection in grant of bail to this applicant.

¶19

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

¶20

As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this applicant established physical relation with the minor prosecutrix in the year 2017 on pretext of marrying her in future. This relationship and the physical exploitation continued. Subsequent to which, the applicant took the prosecutrix to his own house where they resided for some time. Later on, the parents of the applicant refused to have the prosecutrix in their household alleging that she is a sorcerer and, thus, she was driven out of the house.

¶21

¶22

Considered on the submissions and on that basis, I feel inclined to allow the bail application of this applicant.

¶23

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a 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.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)

¶26

Judge

¶27

Nisha

Shiv Kumar Rajwade v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Rajwade 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

Jeetbahan Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakshman Pardhi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Durgesh Singh Vs Shri G. Infrastructure

Smt. Ruhi Agrawal Vs Nimish Agrawal

Mohammad Iqubal Khan Vs Public in General