Allowed

Ritik Raj Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jul 2022MCRCA/228/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The applicant, apprehending arrest for offences under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act, sought relief. The court, finding prima facie evidence of marriage, confirmed a previous ad-interim bail and granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 438 CrPC allowed; applicant granted anticipatory bail subject to furnishing personal bond and meeting specified conditions.

Ritik Raj Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCrC(A) No. 228 of 2022

¶4

Ritik Raj Dewangan Son Of Leelaram Dewangan Aged About 22 Years Residence Of Village Amoda, Tahsil Janjgir, District - Janjgeer Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Janjgir, District - Janjgeer Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Respondent - For Applicant Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate - For Respondent / State Shri Pushplata Xalxo, P.L.

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶10

Order on Board

¶11

21/07/2022

¶12

This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 582/2021 registered in Police Station - Janjgir, District - Janjgeer Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and 4 & 6 of POCSO Act, 1860 .

¶13

Allegation against the applicant is that on the pretext of marriage he committed forcibly sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix from the period of 13.03.2018 to 16.10.2021.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that this Court 17/02/2022 pass an order of granting ad-intrem bail to the applicant. Considering the fact that the FIR was lodged in the year 2022, and the applicant was major and she has married to the applicant.

¶15

No obection has been filed by the objector.

¶16

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

¶17

Considered the facts and cisrcumstances age of the prosecutrix, prima facie it appears that the applicant married to the prosecutrix. No objection was been filed by the objector and he is in Jail since 13/11/2021. I am inclined to confirm the order dated 17/02/2022 and grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶18

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/investigating officer, with the following terms and conditions:

¶19

(i)that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the concerned investigating officer as and when required;

¶20

(ii)that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

(iii)that the applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

¶22

(iv)that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶23

It is made clear that the observations made here-in-above are only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial court will decide the case on its own merit without being influenced by any observation made here-in-above. If any one of the above conditions is violated by applicant, the State will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of the bail granted to him.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Sachin Singh Rajput)

¶26

Judge

¶27

Ashish

Ritik Raj Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik Raj Dewangan 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

Shiv Kumar Sonkar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jivanlal Mahara Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Nilkanth Pandurang Kolhekar Vs Union Of India

Sanjay Mandal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Balwant Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Gaein @ Madan Vs State of Chhattisgarh