Chand @ Chandu Sanvra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 02.06.2024 in connection with Crime No.178/2024 registered at Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act.

¶15

2. As per prosecution case, on 06.03.2024 a missing report was lodged by the father of prosecutrix that her minor daughter is missing since 04.03.2024 and her whereabouts could not be traced out. The police has registered the offence under Section 363 IPC and started investigation. During investigation she came back to her house on 10.03.2024. After recording her statement, the police added other offences of Sections 366, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 5(l) and 6 of

¶16

2 / 3

¶17

POCSO Act. The appellant was arrested on 03.04.2024 and charge sheet has been filed.

¶18

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. There is no cogent evidence on record that prosecutrix was minor on the date of incident. She herself eloped along with applicant on her own will and made consensual physical relation without any protest by the prosecutrix. No complaint has been made to anyone when she was allegedly going with the applicant. In 164 CrPC statement the prosecutrix have not raised any allegation against the applicant that he committed rape upon her. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail as final adjudication will take its own time.

¶19

4. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the bail application on the ground that the applicant has ravished the prosecutrix. From the evidence collected during investigation, the prosecutrix appears to be minor. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶20

5. Without commenting on merits, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the age and conduct of the prosecutrix, considering the nature of allegation and material collected during investigation particularly in view of statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC of the prosecutrix, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail.

¶21

6. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance on each

¶22

3 / 3

¶23

date of hearing before the trial Court, unless exempted from personal appearance by the said Court.

¶24

7. It is made clear that the observations made by this court is only restricted to the decision of bail application and shall not affect the merits of the case. The trial court is expected to decide the case on its own merit without being influenced by any of the observations made

¶25

hereinabove.

¶26

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶27

inder

Chand @ Chandu Sanvra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chand @ Chandu Sanvra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sameer Khan @ Mohd. Sameer Hussain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jayanarayan Kannauje Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kuldeep Baik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ravi Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemant @ Hemlal Chakradhari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rahul Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh