High CourtsSingle Bench

Manoj Chaturvedi vs State Of M.P. & Anr

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 7 May 2021 · Citation: (2021) 05 MP CK 0049

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.S. Ahluwalia, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 323, 363, 371, 376, 506 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.22603 Of 2021
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

15 paragraphs · 273 words

G.S. Ahluwalia, J

This third repeat application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 17/01/2021 in connection with Crime No.447/2020 registered at Police Station Jhansi Road, District Gwalior for

offence under Sections 376, 371, 323, 506, 363 and 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act.

It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is alleged to have made preparation for marriage of the minor girl aged about 14

years. It is submitted that in fact the girl was major on the date of marriage i.e. 28/11/2017.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the Counsel for the State. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the date of birth of the

girl is 14/07/2002 and on the date of marriage i.e. 28/11/2017 she was minor below the age of 18 years.

Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties.

So far as, the age of the prosecutrix is concerned, this Court by a detailed order passed today in MCRC No.16435/2021 (Smt. Mamta Chaturvedi &

Anr. Vs. State of M.P.) has considered the defence of the applicant in detail and has to come a conclusion that the prosecutrix was minor on the date

of marriage. By marrying a minor girl against her wishes, the applicant and other co-accused persons have compelled her to face the agony of sexual

intercourse without her consent.

Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out for grant of bail.

Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.