Devanlal @ Motu Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1 / 5

¶2

2025:CGHC:12688

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 1108 of 2025

¶6

1 - Devanlal @ Motu Yadav S/o Sonau Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Pasid, Thana Koshir, Tahsil - Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.).

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Thana - Koshir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.).

¶10

... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For State : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, PL

¶11

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma)

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

17/03/2025

¶14

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 15/03/2024 in connection with Crime No.73/2024 , registered at Police Station- Thana Koshir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 (3), 376 (2) (n) & 506 of IPC; Sections 4, 5 (l)/6, 5 (j) (ii)/6 of the POCSO Act; and Section 3 (2) (v) of the

¶15

Digitally signed byASHUTOSH ASHUTOSH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2025.03.19 12:12:18 +0530

¶16

2 / 5

¶17

Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶18

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the father of the prosecutrix/victim lodged a written report on 05/03/2024 stating therein that the applicant enticed away the victim from the lawful custody of her parents despite knowing full well that the prosecutrix is a minor and took her on his motorcycle to Shinghanpur Mod and committed forceful sexual intercourse with her and extended threat to kill on being disclosed to anyone. Thereafter on the basis of the complaint of the complainant the police registered the FIR and the applicant was arrested.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as the FIR has been registered at the behest of the family members of the victim as an afterthought. He would next contend that the complainant has also lodged similar FIR against one Sunil Banjare in the same police station and the said accused has already been enlarged on bail. He would next contend that the initial FIR was lodged against Sunil Banjare but due to pressure of the villagers the second complaint against the present applicant was registered. He would next contend that the FSL & DNA report of the foetus would clearly show that the applicant is not the father of the foetus. He would lastly contend that there is no previous antecedent against the applicant, charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 15/03/2024 and trial is likely to

¶20

3 / 5

¶21

take some time, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be released on bail.

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant.

¶23

The Victim appeared through video conferencing from DLSA, Raigarh before the Court along with her father and they objected to grant of bail to the applicant.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties, perused the case diary and other materials available on record.

¶25

Also perused the DNA report dated 21/06/2024 (Annexure A/4) given by the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur. Perusal of the same would show that the applicant is not the biological father of the foetus of the prosecutrix.

¶26

Considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and specially taking into consideration the DNA Report dated 21/06/2024 which shows that the applicant is not the biological father of the Foetus of the prosecutrix and also considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 15/03/2024 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶27

Let the applicant involved in Crime No.73/2024, registered at Police Station- Thana Koshir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G. for the

¶28

4 / 5

¶29

offences as mentioned above, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/-with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :

¶30

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶31

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

¶32

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS, 2023.

¶33

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as

¶34

5 / 5

¶35

abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶36

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶37

SD/-

¶38

(Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE

¶39

ashu

Devanlal @ Motu Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devanlal @ Motu Yadav 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

Smt. Aparna Arya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nishant Chandel @ Bobby Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramkumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bharat Jagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Kumar Arya Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Kumar Arya Vs Mr. Ashok Juneja