Lokeshwar Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

The applicant has filed this second application under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 252/2024 registered at police station Suhela, district Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87 and 64(2) of BNS and Sections 4 & 6 of theDigitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date:2025.06.25 POCSO Act. 11:48:24 +0530

¶16

2

¶17

The first bail application was rejected on merits vide order dated 07.02.2025 in M.Cr.C No. 8920/2024.

¶18

Prosecution case in brief is that a missing report was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix alleging that her daughter who is minor aged about 12 years 10 months and nine days was found missing. Thereafter, during investigation father of the applicant brought the applicant to the police statement where he disclosing that the applicant lured the prosecutrix with him to Raigarh and committed sexual intercourse with her. On the basis of the said report, the applicant was arrested.

¶19

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that mother, father and the victim have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application.

¶21

Mother of the victim appeared through the concerned DLSA and have raised no objection.

¶22

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶23

On due consideration of the rival submissions and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 11.10.2024, the charge sheet has been filed and looking to the fact that the material witnesses- mother, father and

¶24

3

¶25

the prosecutrix have not supported the case of prosecution and that the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, the present application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, his bail application is allowed.

¶26

It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶27

i) He shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶28

ii) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶29

Iii) the applicant is directed not to communicate/contact in any manner with the prosecutrix, her family members and the witnesses cited in the charge sheet any other person concerned or attempt to ask for any favour in the trial directly or indirectly.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

Judge

Digitally signed
by SUGUNA
SUGUNA DUBEY
DUBEYsuguna Date:2025.06.2511:22:37 +0530

Lokeshwar Das Manikpuri v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokeshwar Das Manikpuri 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

Nikahat Parveen Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Kesharwani Rice Mill Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Kesharwani Rice Mill Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Ravindra Yadu Vs Chhattisgarh Woman Commission

Dankeshwar Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mirnal Rai Vs State of Chhattisgarh