Viplav Mandal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Pushplata Khalkho, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board

¶11

10-12-2024

¶12

Heard on the application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been detained in jail in connection with Crime No.125/2021 registered at P.S. - Farasgaon, DistrictKondagaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the IPC, Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘the POCSO Act’).

¶13

The case of the prosecution is that, on 18-11-2021 father of the proseutrix lodged a missing report that his minor daughter is missing since 16-11-2021 and her whereabouts could not be traced out. The police registered the offence under Sectin 363 of the IPC and started investigation. During the investigation the proseccutrix came back to her house on 22-11-2021 and her

¶14

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN

¶15

2 / 3

¶16

father has taken her to the police station and after recording her statement the other offences under Section 366, 376(2)(n), 376 (3) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act have been added and the charge sheet has been filed showing the applicant absonding. The applicant has surrendered before the learned trial Court on 27-08-2024.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the appliacnt has been faslely implicated in the offence. The prosecutrix had gone to her maternal uncle’s house at vill Jamrunda, Odisha and only on suspicion the applicant has been made as an accused in the present case. He would furthe submit that the prosecutrix and her parents have been examined before the learned trial Court as PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 and they have not supported the prosecution case and have comletely truned hostile. The applicant is in jail since 27-08-2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, he may enlarged on bail.

¶18

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that from the materiall collected during the investigation the prosecutrix appears to be minor and she was subjected to sexual exploitation by the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶19

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 fact that the applicant is in jail since 27-08-2024 and 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.

¶20

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 two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, on the following conditions :-

¶21

3 / 3

¶22

(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 ;

¶23

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

¶24

(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.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶27

Aadil

Viplav Mandal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viplav Mandal 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

Sonu @ Ajit Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohd. Jakir Hussain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishal Kumar Rajak Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khusboo Nayak Vs Ghanshyama Patel

V. v. Raman Patnayak Vs Smt. v. Gayatri Raman Patnayak

Rajendra Khairwar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh