Mukesh Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

For Applicant : Mr. Uttam Pandey, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Mandavi Bhardwaj, Panel Lawyer. For Complainant/objector Mr. K.P.S. Gandhi, Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

19-11-2024

¶15

Heard on the application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 2405-2024 in connection with Crime No.243/2024 registered at P.S. - Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of the IPC, Section 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘the POCSO Act’) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short ‘the SC/ST Act’).

¶16

The case of the prosecution is that, on 29-04-2024 the prosecutrix has lodged a written report against the applicant that he committed rape upon her

¶17

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN

¶18

2 / 3

¶19

on 31-12-2022 and continued in making physical relation with her on pretext of marriage. On 11-08-2023 he took her to Dongargarh by motorcycle where he performed marriage with her by exchanging garlands. Thereafter, he took her in various places and kept her in lodge and committed rape upon her which continued upto 17-02-2024. On 17-02-2024 when they resided in a rented house at Bilaspur, he left her and has not returned back, thereafter, she called her parents and lodged the report on 29-04-2024. The FIR has been registered for offence under Section 363, 366, 376 (2)(n) of the IPC and section Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. During the investigation the applicant has been arrested on 24-05-2024 and charge sheet has been filed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the the prosecutrix being major girl having love affair with the applicant has engaged in making consensual physical relation him. There is no cogent evidence on record to show that she was minor. The prosecutrix eloped with the applicant on 11-082023, both of them had gone to Dongargarh where they perform marriage. Thereafter, they resided together as husband and wife upto 17-02-2024, therefore, no offence of rape is make out against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 24-05-2024 and the final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that from the evidence available in the charge sheet, the prosecturix was minor and she was sexually exploited by the applicant upto 17-02-2024 and when he left her she lodged the report. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶22

Learned counsel for the complainant/objector has also opposes and objected the bail application.

¶23

3 / 3

¶24

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation and further considering the length of their relationship as also the fact that on 17-02-2024 the applicant left the prosecutrix, whereas the report has been lodged on 29-04-2024 and that the applicant is in jail since 24-05-2024 and the final adjudication of the case will take its own time, without commenting anything on merits of the case I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶25

Consequently, this application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the 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 the concerned trial Court, on the following conditions :-

¶26

(i) He shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court ;

¶27

(ii) He shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

¶28

(iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial unless his personal presence is exempted by the trial Court.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶31

Aadil

Mukesh Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Jaiswal 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

Ram Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilshan Lahare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pritam @ Davel Kurrey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vedansh Jaiswal Vs Sanjay Jaiswal

Doman Kanwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pawan Kumar Miri Vs State of Chhattisgarh