Mukesh Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

Mukesh Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: applicant to furnish a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, conditioned that (a) he shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date unless exempted; (b) he shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses; and (c) if he is found involved in a similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, in custody since 30.9.2023 in Crime No.151/2023 (PS Darima, Surguja) for offences under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC and Sections 4, 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, should be released on regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, and counsel's submissions based on the victim's deposition, and without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court was inclined to enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed; the applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, subject to the stated conditions (regular appearance, no tampering with prosecution witnesses, and liberty to the State to seek cancellation if he is found involved in a similar offence in future).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail order — High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Parth Prateem Sahu, J.), 09.02.2024, MCRC No.185 of 2024. First bail application under Section 439 CrPC by Mukesh Singh (aged about 18 years), in custody since 30.9.2023 in Crime No.151/2023, PS Darima, District Surguja, for offences under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC and Sections 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on the allegation that he enticed and eloped with a minor girl aged less than 16 years and committed sexual intercourse with her against her wishes. Charge sheet had been filed. During trial, the victim deposed before the trial Court that she does not recognize the applicant and that he has done nothing wrong with her; the victim and her father, appearing virtually through the DLSA Ambikapur help desk, submitted they had no objection to bail. Without commenting on the merits, the Court enlarged the applicant on regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum, imposing conditions of regular trial attendance, non-tampering with prosecution witnesses, and exposing him to a State application for cancellation of bail if involved in a similar offence in future.

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCRC No.185 of 2024

Mukesh Singh S/o Phitul Singh Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Jhalpi Harratoli, Balrampur, District- BalrampurRamanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant (In jail)

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Darima, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

....Non-applicant

For Applicant : Mr. Nishi Kant Sinha, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Order On Board

09.02.2024

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 30.9.2023 in connection with Crime No.151/2023 registered at Police Station Darima, District Surguja (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 of IPC and Section 4, 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that applicant enticed and eloped with the victim, a minor girl of less than 16 years, and thereafter committed sexual intercourse with her against her wishes.

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in instant crime.

2

During trial, the victim has been examined before the Court below and she has stated that she does not recognize applicant nor he has done anything wrong with her. As she had gone to house of her maternal grand parents without informing her family members, therefore, they have lodged missing report of her. Applicant is in jail since 30.9.2023, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take some, hence, applicant be released on regular bail.

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that deposition of victim relied upon by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of appreciation by trial Court.

Victim and her father appeared before this Court through virutal mode from the help desk of DLSA Ambikapur. They submit that they have no objection in grant of bail to applicant.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for applicant based on deposition of victim, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on regular bail.

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 trial Court concerned on

3

the conditions that;

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

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

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

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

roshan/-