Allowed

Ashish Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Jan 2023MCRCA/1550/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by an applicant apprehending arrest under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of the IPC regarding repeated sexual intercourse on the pretext of marriage. The Court granted bail stating the prosecutrix was a major consenting party.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on anticipatory bail subject to execution of a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the same amount and compliance with standard bail conditions.

Ashish Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Anticipatory Bail | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 1550 of 2022

¶5

Ashish Tiwari, S/o Shri Shravan Kumar Tiwari, Aged About 28 Years, R/o E.W.S. 1319, Housing Board, Ward No. 16, I.E. Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg (Chhattisgarh)

¶6

	Versus	---- Applicant
State Of Chhattisgarh Tikrapara, District Raipur	Through The Station House (Chhattisgarh) ----	Officer, P.S. Respondent
For Applicant :	Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate.
For Respondent. :	Mr. Jitendra Shukla, P.L.
For Objector :	Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Adv	ocate.

¶7

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey

¶8

Order on Board

¶9

23/01/2023

¶10

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.581/2022 registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)((n) and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

¶11

Allegation against the present applicant is that he committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix many times on the pretext of marriage and thereafter refused to marry her.

¶12

Learned counsel submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the prosecutrix is in relationship with the applicant for more than one year. Learned counsel also submits that the prosecutrix herself used to call the applicant to meet her at Hotel and he used to pay the hotel bills. Learned counsel also submits that the prosecutrix is major aged

¶13

¶14

around 24 years and she is the consenting party to the act of the applicant. He also submits that there is unexplained and inordinate delay of one year in lodging the FIR. Thus, considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶15

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the anticipatory bail application. He also submits that the prosecutrix, in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement, specifically stated that the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marriage.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Objector vehemently opposing the application submits that it is the applicant who used to call the prosecutrix and satiated his lust on the assurance that he would marry her.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having considered the fact that the prosecutrix appears to be 24 years of age major girl, they were visiting each other for last one year, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail.

¶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 solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/investigating officer or the court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions:

¶19

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation/medical examination 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 as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶21

¶22

(iii) that the applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶23

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶24

pkd

Ashish Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Tiwari 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

Yogesh Kumar Sahu Vs Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank and Ors.

Gurjinder Pal Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Rekha Bai Tandan Vs Hiravan Thakur

Smt. Seema Ghritesh Vs Heera Bai

Shyam Prasad Gupta Vs Shiv Prasad Gupta