Jatu Ram & ANR v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5674 of 2019

1. Jatu Ram S/o Chinru, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Dumarkola, Police Station Pasta, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

2. Lalo Bai W/o Jatu Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Dumarkola, Police Station Pasta, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through : Police Station Pasta, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicants :

Shri Manoj Paranjape, Advocate For Respondent :

Ms. Reena Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board /11/2019 1.

The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.42/2019, registered at Police Station - Pasta, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376 (2) (n), 323/34 IPC, Sections 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 75 & 84 of Juvenile Justice Act.

2.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 15.06.2019, the father of the prosecutrix lodged a report alleging therein that on 19.02.2019, the applicants along with their son came to the house of prosecutrix and forcefully compelled her to come along with them to their house. Further case is that, the prosecutrix lived in the house of applicants for a period of three months and during that period, the son of the

applicants committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix and also harassed her mentally. Based on this report, offence has been registered. Present applicants have been taken into custody on 17.06.2019.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that there was love affair between the prosecutrix and son of the applicants' and the prosecutrix of her own came to the house of applicants'. He also submits that the present applicants are in custody since 17.06.2019, charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near feature. Therefore, they may be released on bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that the applicants are father and mother of main accused, they are in custody since 17.06.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release them on bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8.

It is directed that the Applicants shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Pekde