High CourtsSingle Bench

Akash vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0035

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Awasthi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 366(A), 376(2)(n) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012 — Section 5(L), 6
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5140/2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 441 words

This first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime

No.309/2019 registered at Police Station Industrial Area Ratlam, District Ratlam (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 366-A and 376 (2) (n) of

the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Section 5 (L) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of the allegations made by the prosecutrix regarding abduction, inducement and commission of rape on the

pretext of marriage, the case has been registered against the present applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a young boy aged about 20 years and he has not committed any offence.

Although the prosecutrix is a minor girl aged about 17 years, however, she has not made any allegation against the applicant regarding abduction or

commission of rape in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In the aforesaid statement, she stated that

she was having love affair with the applicant and had gone with the applicant on her own accord. The applicant is in custody since 02.08.2019. The

investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. There is no possibility of his / her absconsion or tampering with the evidence, if enlarged

on bail. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to

the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that no sufficient ground is

made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he prayed for rejection of the application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the

merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his / her furnishing a personal

bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his / her

regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and

shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy, as per rules.