Yash Kumar Verma @ Yashu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1038 of 2024

¶5

Yash Kumar Verma @ Yashu Son Of Daulatram Verma Aged About 18 Years 06 Months Resident Of Village Dhara, Police Chowki Mohara, Tahsil Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. (As Per Charge Sheet)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Non-Applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

04/04/2024

¶14

Learned counsel for applicant submits that pursuant to order dated 27.02.2024, applicant surrendered before learned Trial Court on 27.03.2024. Order sheet in this regard has been placed on record.

¶15

Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he was arrested in connection with Crime No. 738 of 2023 registered at Police Station Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (N) of I.P.C. and Section 5 (L), 6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶16

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, applicant is resident of

¶17

2

¶18

same village. He was known to victim and established physical relation with her on the pretext of marriage on 13.02.2023 and thereafter on many occasions. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered and applicant was arrested on 16.11.2023.

¶19

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent & has not committed any offence as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned crime. Even if allegation of establishing physical relation is taken on its face value, then it is clearly appearing that the victim was consentual party. In the evidence of father it has come that date of birth of victim is of the year 06.06.2002. She was major on the date of incident, hence no offence would be made out. He referred to deposition of father of victim in support of his contention.

¶20

Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that as per documents available in the case diary, the date of birth of victim is 06.06.2006, as per allegation. On the date of incident, victim was less that 18 years of age. He further submits that deposition which is relied upon by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of appreciation by learned Trial Court.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for applicant based upon the deposition of father of victim, without

¶23

3

¶24

commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that -

¶26