Roshan Paswan v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 5047 of 2021 Roshan Paswan S/o Bharat Ram Paswan Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Wadrufnagar, Police Station Basantpur, District BalrampurRamanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For the Applicant :
Shri Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate.
For the Respondent/State :
Ms. Shivali Dubey, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant
ORDER
05.08.2021 Heard.
1.
This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.55 of 2021, registered at Police Station - Basantpur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366-a and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 7.4.2021 and has been falsely implicated in this case. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. clearly shows that she
was willing and consenting party. The applicant intends to challenge the ground of minority of the prosecutrix in the trial. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.
3.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and the submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that the age of the prosecutrix had been only 14 years and 4 months on the date of incident, therefore, her consent and willingness is immaterial. Hence, no case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant. 4.
The prosecutrix is present before this virtual Court through the HelpDesk of the DLSA, Balrampur. She made a statement that she has no objection in grant of bail to the applicant.
5.
Heard counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary. 6.
According to the prosecution case, it is alleged that this applicant abducted the minor prosecutrix, kept her in his custody and then exploited her sexually more than one occasion knowing well that she is not competent to such consent. Hence, this case.
7.
Considered the submissions and the facts present in this case. Looking to the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and also the statement of no objection made by the prosecutrix herself, I feel inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant.
8.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.
9.
It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for his appearance as and when directed. In case any default is committed by the applicant/s in appearing before the concerned trial Court, this order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically.
Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nimmi