Allowed

Sumit Kumar Sahu @ Surendra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Jan 2022MCRC/9202/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the release of the applicant arrested in a POCSO and rape case. Relying on the admission by the prosecutrix via Aadhar card that she had attained majority on the date of the alleged incident, the Court held it was a fit case for regular bail.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on regular bail.

Sumit Kumar Sahu @ Surendra Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

MCRC No.9202 of 2021

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 9202 of 2021

¶6

Sumit Kumar Sahu @ Surendra S/o Shri Bihari Prasad Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Laoharsi (Son), Police Station Pachpedi, Civil And Revenue District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Pachpedi, Civil And Revenue District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For Applicant Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent /State Ms. Akshra Amit, Panel Lawyer For Victim Mr. Harish Chelkar, Advocate Victim is also present in person

¶12

Order on Board By

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶14

5/1/2022

¶15

Heard.

¶16

The applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.304/2021, registered at Police Station Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (CG), for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶17

¶18

MCRC No.9202 of 2021

¶19

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant has enticed away the minor girl from the lawful custody of her parents and committed sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated. On the date of alleged incident i.e. 25-9-2001 the prosecutrix has already attained the age of majority, as her date of birth, as per Aadhar Card, is 15-3-2003. Thus, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State, per contra, would oppose the bail application.

¶22

Victim appeared in person before this Court along with her counsel Mr. Harish Chelkar. Copy of Aadhar Card when is confronted to the victim, wherein her date of birth is mentioned as 15-3-2003, she admits the same. She also stated that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Considering the entire facts situation of the case, particularly considering the submission of the prosecutrix; as also the fact that the applicant is in detention since 23-10-2021, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to release the applicant on regular bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court.

¶25

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Goutam Bhaduri)

Gowri

Judge

Sumit Kumar Sahu @ Surendra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Kumar Sahu @ Surendra 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

Ravi Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mewalal Rajwade Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arun Saarthi, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Saddam Husain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anwarul Haque Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajkumar Vaidya Vs State of Chhattisgarh