Sanjit Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2797 of 2018 Sanjit Singh S/o Ram Khilawan Singh, Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Saroriya, Police Station Ujiyarpur, District Samastipur, Bihar, C/o House Of Ajit Randhawa, M.I.G. 1/4, Sector -2, Udya Society Tatibandh Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Applicant Of Father Name Is Wrongly Mentioned In Order Sheets)., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Amanaka Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate For State :

Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 04/05/2018 Heard.

1. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.213 of 2017 registered in Police Station- Aamanaka, Raipur, District- Raipur, for the alleged commission of offence under Section 377 IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant committed unnatural offence with a 4 years old boy.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the trial has not been concluded till date though the applicant has remained in jail since 14.9.2017. He would further submit that as the child and father of the child have already been examined, therefore, at this stage, the applicant may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

-2He would submit that looking to the nature and gravity of allegation against the applicant, only on the ground that the applicant is in jail since 14.9.2017, he is not entitled to grant of bail.

5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. However, the trial Court shall do well to conclude the trial as early as possible. If the trial is not concluded within a reasonable time, the applicant may revive the application.

6. The application is accordingly rejected.

Sd/-/---- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen