Mukeshwar Dhruv v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 723 of 2016 • Mukeshwar Dhruv S/o Shri Roop Singh Dhruv Aged About 29 Years R/O P.S.I. Police Line, Thana Civil Line, Civil & Revenue District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Thana Koni, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For the applicant :

Mr. Mahesh Mishra, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Arvind Shukla, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 10.08.2016

1. Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 137 of 2016 registered at Police Station Koni Distt. Bilaspur (C.G) for the offences punishable under section 376(2)(a) (I)(II) of IPC, the applicant has filed this application u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. As per the prosecution case, a report was made by the victim that the applicant who is working as a Police Officer came in contact with him and subsequently she fell in love with him, however, the applicant never expressed about his love affair and eventually on 25.07.2016, the applicant came to the house of victim and while she was alone he wanted to have sexual relations which was refused by her, upon which, the applicant took out vermilion and put it on her forehead and thereafter he committed forcible sexual intercourse. Thereafter she became pregnant and when it was

informed to the applicant, he asked her to abort the pregnancy and refused to marry the victim.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated. He submits that the report and the statements of the victim are contradictory to each other and the victim with the help of some reporters are trying to black-mail the applicant and an amount of Rs.5 lakhs has been demanded, therefore, he has been falsely inculpated.

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

5. Perused the case diary documents and the statements of victim. It appears that detailed statements have been made by the victim. Considering such statements and and the case diary, I am not inclined to allow this bail application. Accordingly, it is rejected.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o