Omprakash Pandey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2667 of 2020 Omprakash Pandey S/o Manglu Pandey Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bisora, Police Station Beltukri, District Nuapada, Orrisa ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Komakhan, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Shri Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Ms. Veena Nair, Dy. A.G.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Smt.Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 28.5.2020 1.

Heard.

2.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.188/2019, registered at Police Station Komakhan, District - Mahasamund (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (n) of the IPC and Section 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3 (2) (V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3.

As per the case of prosecution, on 05.12.2019 father of the prosecutrix lodged FIR in the police station stating in it that on 01.12.2019, when he came back to home from the agricultural field, he did not find his daughter inside the house. On being searched nearby his house, he did not find her daughter. He

also stated in the FIR that due to some ill intention, someone has kidnapped her daughter. Based on this, FIR has been lodged against the applicant.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits the applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. He further submits that the prosecutrix is aged about 17 years and the applicant is in jail since 21.01.2020 and trial may take some time for its final disposal therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He submits that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix was minor.

6.

Perused the entire material available on record. 7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the nature of allegations against the applicant and further considering that the prosecutrix is aged above 16 years; charge sheet has been filed and trial may take some for its final disposal, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

8.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

9.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one local surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed till the disposal of the trial.

10.

It is made clear that if the applicant has already been released on bail pursuant to the bail bonds already furnished in view of the order passed by the High Power Committee constituted in compliance of the order of the Supreme Court of India dated 23.3.2020 in the matter of In Re : Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in Prisons (Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 1/2020), he need not furnish bail bonds afresh and the bail bonds already furnished shall be deemed to be the bail bonds furnished in compliance of the order of this Court, but if he has not furnished the bail bonds earlier, then he will be required to furnish bail bonds within four weeks from today. 11.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) JUDGE yasmin