Akil Ahmad v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3675 of 2016 Akil Ahmad, S/o. Late Turab Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o. Shanti Nagar, Dipka P.O. & Police Station- Dipka, Tahsil- Katghora, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate Korba, Police StationDipka, Tahsil- Katghora, Civil & District - Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mr. P.K.C.Tiwari, Senior Advocate with Mr.

Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Dy. G.A.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 14.07.2016 1.

This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.92/2015 registered at Police Station- Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 376, 384, 506-B, 34 of Indian Penal Code. The first bail application was dismissed on 16.12.2015.

2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused Dharmendra Pal was having relation with the prosecutrix and since they were in love affairs from 2010 to 2014, she was sexually exploited. Subsequently, Dharmendra Pal refused to marry the complainant and thereafter she was married and went to Manendragarh after her marriage. While she came back after some time Dharmendra Pal again with the help of Akil Ahmed sent a message to develop

relations as it was existing before the marriage and thereafter the amount was demanded by these applicants on the pretext that they are holding the video clippings of physical relations and if the amount is not paid it will be made viral, therefore, the initial amount of Rs.75,000/- paid from the account of the prosecutrix. Subsequently, the amount was escalated and demand of Rs.2 Lakhs was made and thereafter a report has been made. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegations of rape are attributed to the other co-accused and against this applicant only the charges are framed under Section 384 and the applicant is in jail since more than 9 months, therefore, considering the same, he may be released on bail.

4.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

Perused the statement of the victim. Taking into such statement and the allegation attributed, I do not find any change of circumstances to reconsider the case and appreciate the evidence by picking up the lines of deposition of victim. Taking into totality, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 6.

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

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Ashok