Allowed

Sunni @ Manish Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Sept 2021MCRC/5681/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC by an applicant charged with rape and POCSO offences. Considering the applicant's production of a child, the absence of objection from the prosecutrix and her mother, and the conditions of the bond, the court directed the applicant's release.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount, subject to conditions of regular appearance and no tampering with witnesses.

Sunni @ Manish Pandey Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

(Proceedings through video conferencing)

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No.5681 of 2021

¶5

Sunni @ Manish Pandey, S/o Ram Milan Pandey, A/A 21 Years, R/o Bamauri, Police Station Katra, District Bhadauri (U.P.), present address Tiraiya, Police Station Dharsiva, District Raipur (CG)

¶6

---- Applicant (In Jail)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station- Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (CG).

¶9

....Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Srikant Kaushik, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶12

3.9.2021

¶13

This is first application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who is in custody since 9.7.2021 in connection with Crime No.451/2020 registered at Police Station Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 376 (2) (n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶14

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the night intervening 23^rd & 24^th December, 2012 applicant took the prosecutrix along with him to the house of his friend situated in Ambikapur and there he forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. After staying for some time in Ambikapur, on 5.1.2021 applicant left the prosecutrix in Raipur from where she went to her parents' house and thereafter report of incident was

¶15

¶16

lodged against applicant.

¶17

Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel for applicant would submit that out of physical relationship between applicant and prosecutrix, a male child was born, who is about two & half months. Prosecutrix is more than 18 years of age. Applicant has been arrested by police on 9.7.2021, charge sheet has already been filed and conclusion of trial may take some time. Hence, applicant may be granted regular bail.

¶18

Per contra, Mr. Srikant Kaushik, learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC has made allegation of forcible sexual intercourse with her by applicant in the house of his friend. However, he submits that in the statement recorded under Section 164 of CrPC the prosecutrix has stated that now applicant intends to marry her. He submits that on the date of incident, prosecutrix was below 18 years of age, hence applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail.

¶19

Prosecutrix and her mother are also present in person through virtual mode from the District Legal Services Authority, Raipur. They state that they are having no objection in grant of regular bail to applicant. The prosecutrix states that she is residing in the house of applicant.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions made by learned counsel for applicant as also prosecutrix and her mother, without

¶22

¶23

commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

¶24

Accordingly, the application is allowed and 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 trial Court concerned on the conditions that;

¶25

a) he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance.

¶26

b) he shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶27

c) If applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶28

Certified copy as per rules.

¶29

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶30

roshan/-

Sunni @ Manish Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunni @ Manish Pandey 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

Usha Bai Vs Tuleshwar Sahu

Gyanvati @ Gyanmati Vs Kamlesh Kumar Yadav

Smt. Shanti Agrawal Vs Shyam Shukla

Hemant @ Harshit Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Niranjan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh