High CourtsSingle Bench

Nirbal Hallu Sour vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 23 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 MP CK 0112

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 376(a), 376(2) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 24181 Of 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

25 paragraphs · 466 words

Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan, J

Heard on this first post-arrest application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail.

The applicant is in jail since 24.04.2020 in connection with Crime No.72/2020, registered at Police Station-Baxwah, District-Chhatarpur for offence

under Sections 363, 376(a), 376(2) of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act.

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that, on the date of incident prosecutrix, who was minor at the time of incidence, and her sister went to the

forest for picking Mahua Flower. At that time applicant along with other co-accused appeared there and allured both the girls. Both girls went along

with the applicant and co-accused and there applicant committed rape upon the prosecutrix.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. Prosecutrix in her statement recorded under

Section 164 of CrPC did not state anything about rape, she only stated that she went for taking a ride with the applicant, but applicant did nothing with

her. It is further submitted that after investigation charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since 24.04.2020 and trial will take

considerable time for its disposal. Looking to the present situation of widespread of Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19), it is prayed that the applicant be

enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has vehemently opposed the application and prays for dismissal of this application.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of CrPC. No doubt Considering

all the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is not required for any further

investigation and also looking to the present situation of widespread of Novel Corona virus (Covid-19), without commenting on the merits of the case,

this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail.

 It is directed that applicant Nirbal @ Hallu Sour shall be released on bail on his 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 the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Court with a

condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3)

of Cr.P.C.

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

 Jail authorities and State Government are directed to follow the guidelines issued by the Health Ministry in the wake of Novel Corona Virus, before

and after releasing the applicant.

 Certified copy as per rules.