Ravi Temre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2888 of 2020 • Ravi Temre S/o Devlal Temre aged about 24 years, R/o Village Adawal, Jagdalpur, P.S. Bodhghat, District-Bastar, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Bodhghat, District-Bastar, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicant :

Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Adv.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Ayaz Naved, G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 19/06/2020

1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 143/2020 registered at Police Station Bodhghat, District-Bastar (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 376 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that, prosecutrix lodged a written complaint that she is a constable in the Home Guards and prior one year she met with the applicant and it is alleged that on the pretext of marriage applicant committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix from the past one year, later on he has denied to marry her and also assaulted to the prosecutrix with hands and fist. Based on this offence has been registered against the present applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. She further submits that the prosecutrix is a major lady aged about 35 years and there have a love affair between the prosecutrix and applicant. She next submits that the applicant is in jail since 10.05.2020, there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the allegation against the applicant is of serious in nature; the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on false promise, therefore, no case is made out for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of applicant and further considering that the age of the prosecutrix is about 35 years and the applicant is in jail since 10.05.2020, and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court.

8. It is made clear that if the applicant has already been released on bail pursuant to the bail bond 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 23.03.2020 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 bond afresh and the bail bond already furnished shall be deemed to be the bail bond furnished in compliance of the order of this Court, but if he has not furnished the bail bond earlier, then he will be required to furnish bail bond within four weeks from today.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge H.L. Sahu