High CourtsSingle Bench

Mangru Ram Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 23 April 2018 · Citation: (2018) 04 CHH CK 0285

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. SAM KOSHY, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376 (2), 506, 417
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
M.Cr.C. No.1574 of 2018
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

19 paragraphs · 398 words
1.

The applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Crime No.15/2018 registered at Police Station City

Kotwali, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (2) (2. Present applicant is in jail since 09/01/2018.

3.

The allegation against the present applicant as per the prosecution case is that, the present applicant on the pretext of marriage is said to have had

physical relationship with the prosecutrix for a considerable period of time and thereafter it is said that he has ditched the prosecutrix and have refused

to marry her which led to the filing of the F.I.R.

4.

The counsel for the applicant submits that, even if the entire version of the prosecution if it is accepted in its totality, it would be a clear case of

consensual relationship between the two. He further submits that, the prosecutrix otherwise was a married lady, so also was the present applicant and

this itself is sufficient indication of the prosecutrix being a consenting party to the physical relationship and he thus prayed for releasing the applicant

on bail.

5.

The State counsel however opposing the bail application submits that the present applicant is said to have exploited the prosecutrix on the pretext of

marriage and in the course the prosecutrix also is said to have conceived and lateron a child from the relationship which the prosecutrix had with the

present applicant was born, which stands confirmed from the D.N.A. report and therefore the present applicant does not deserve to be released on

bail and thus prayed for rejection of the appeal.

6.

Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of record, particularly considering the statement of the prosecutrix, the age of

the prosecutrix so also the fact that the prosecutrix and the applicant both were married persons, this Court is of the opinion that, prima-facie, a strong

case has been made out for grant of bail to the present applicant.

7.

Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for

a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court. The applicant shall thereafter appear before the

Trial Court on each and every date given by the said court.