Allowed

Virendra Bhardwaj v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Feb 2024MCRC/447/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC filed by an applicant in custody for offences of rape and sexual assault under IPC and POCSO. The court, considering the victim's age at the time of the incident and the FIR date, granted bail on personal surety without commenting on trial merits.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety.

Virendra Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 447 of 2024

¶4

Virendra Bhardwaj S/o Kartikram, Aged About 25 Years R/o Lalmati, P.S. Urga, Distsrict District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Applicant (in jail) Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Urga, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Non-applicant

¶8

For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Kaiser Baig, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer

¶9

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

¶10

Order On Board

¶11

09.02.2024

¶12

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 20.7.2023 in connection with Crime No.244/2023 registered at Police Station Urga District Korba (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376 (3), 506 Part II of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶13

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.7.2023 victim lodged report in concerned police station alleging that in the year 2013 applicant came to her house and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her and thereafter he continuously established physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage. Due to physical relation, she became pregnant and thereafter applicant refused to marry her. Based on said

¶14

report, aforementioned offence was registered and applicant was arrested on 20.7.2023.

¶15

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in instant crime. On the date of lodging of FIR, victim was aged about 25 years and only to implicate the applicant in graver offence, levelled false allegation that applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her in the year 2013 when she was minor. He contended that from the contents of FIR, it is appearing that applicant and victim were in love; on the date of lodging of FIR, victim was pregnant, which shows that physical relation, if any, between the two was consensual. Applicant is in jail since 20.7.2023, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, hence, applicant be released on regular bail.

¶16

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that applicant for the first time committed forcible sexual intercourse with victim in the year 2013 when she was minor. However, he does not dispute submission of learned counsel for the applicant with regard to age of victim on the date of lodging of report to be 25 years. He submits that as per documents available in charge sheet, date of birth of victim is 6.2.1998.

¶17

Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, victim appeared before this Court on 02.02.2024 through virtual mode from the help desk of DLSA Korba and submitted that she is having objection in grant of bail to applicant.

¶18

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, age of victim on the date of lodging of FIR to be 25 years, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on regular bail.

¶20

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 the conditions that;

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Certified copy as per rules.

¶25

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶26

roshan/-

Virendra Bhardwaj v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Bhardwaj 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

Bhanendra Navrang Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Uday Bariha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kisan Kumar @ Krishna Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Kumar Sarthi Vs State of Chhattisgarh