Anita Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRA No. 194 of 2021 • Anita Kashyap W/o Jitendra Singh Rana Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Bhanaura, Police Station Balrampur District Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ---- Appellant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through P. S. A. Ja. K. Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattigarh --Respondent For Appellant : Shri Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Sameer Uraon, G.A. None for the prosecutrix though served.

Hon'ble Justice Shri Gautam Chourdiya Judgment on Board 26.02.2021

1. This appeal by the accused/appellant under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is directed against the order dated 8.1.2021 passed by the Special Judge (ST/SC Act) Balrampur, Ramanujganj(C.G.) in Crime No. 43/2020, refusing to allow her regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The appellant is in jail since24.8.2020 for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 370 (2), 371, 376 & 34 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (V) of the SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station- AJaAK Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.).

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix was kidnapped by the co-accused persons namely Rajendra Gupta and Sushila Kashyap, taken to Ambikapur Railway Station from Balrampur and handed over to Jitendra @ Jeetu Rana, who took the prosecutrix to Gwalior where Jitendra @ Jeetu Rana handed her over to the co-accused Sonu Kushwaha. On the next day,

the present appellant took the prosecutrix in Temple and forcefully married her to Sonu Kushwaha in lieu thereof Sonu Kushwaha paid Rs. 1,10,000/- to Jitendra @ Jeetu Rana. Thereafter, Sonu Kushwaha had been establishing sexual intercourse repeatedly with the prosecutrix by forcibly making her his wife.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the allegations against the appellant are false and fabricated, she is falsely implicated in the case. He submits that prosecutrix is a major married lady and she was recovered after more than one year from the date of incident i.e. 02.07.2019, main accused in this case namely Rajendra Prasad Gupta has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.11.2020 in CRA No. 680 of 2020, and the appellant/accused has no criminal antecedents and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, at this stage, she may be granted bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes prayer for grant of bail and submits that the appellant has no criminal antecedents.

5. Learned State counsel submits that prosecutrix was duly served with the notice and informed about the present proceedings. However, neither the prosecutrix is present in person nor is there any representation on her behalf.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the contents of FIR and other material, it appears that the prosecutrix is a major lady, initially missing report of prosecutrix was lodged and thereafter the prosecutrix was recovered after more than one year from Gwalior (M.P.), the prosecutrix was resided with the co-accused Sonu Kushwaha after marrying him, she was allegedly taken from Balrampur to Ambikapur Railway Station and thereafter to Gwalior (M.P.) but at no point of time she raised hue and cry and made any

complaint to anyone, co-accused person namely Rajendra Prasad Gupta has already been granted bail; detention period of the appellant; the fact that the appellant has no criminal antecedents as admitted by both the counsel and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant for grant of bail is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.

7. It is directed that in the event of the appellant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, she shall be released on bail on following conditions:- (a) she 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 fact to the Court.

(b) she shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (c) she shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

(d) she shall not involve herself in any offence of similar nature in future or else this order granting bail to the appellant shall automatically stand cancelled without further reference to the Bench. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned police station forthwith who shall inform the trial Court in the event of appellant involving herself in similar nature of offence in future. - Sd/ (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge sunita