Pawan Kumar Saket vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Devnarayan Mishra, J

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail relating to FIR/Crime No.1017/2024 registered at Police Station-Manjoli, District-Sidhi (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(2) (m) of BNS, 2023 and sections 5(I)/6 of POCSO Act The applicant is in custody since 26.10.2024.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. It is submitted that the victim at the time of offence, as per the record of prosecution, was 17 years and 4 months and in her statement, she was unable to explain that on what basis, her date of birth was recorded. Her mother (PW-2) and School Teacher (PW-4) also were unable to explain on what basis, date of birth of the victim was recorded. Thus, the date of birth of the victim is doubtful. He has further submitted that the victim was a consenting party. She went along with the applicant and on tutoring of the family members, she has stated false story against the present applicant and in the statement recorded before the Court, she has further improved her statement. FIR was lodged after a delay of 3 days and no explanation has been given for that. The applicant is also the young person of 18 years. The applicant is in custody and trial will take time to be concluded. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not repeat the offence, hence, the applicant be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the objector has submitted that the applicant and his family members are threatening the victim that they will not allow her to marry any other person and they will disclose the whole story to the family members of the proposed groom and they are making pressure. Victim was kidnapped and sexually assaulted but due to negligence and omission on the part of the police authority, timely, the medical was not done and on these circumstances, if the DNA of the applicant is not positive, then, victim would not be liable or held for the act. Under these circumstances, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and submitted that victim was minor as per DNA report, samples were uninterruptible and victim has supported the prosecution case, hence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

Heard the parties and perused the case diary.

Looking to the margin of age and statement of victim's mother and school teacher and DNA report and the improvement in the prosecution story in the Court statement, the trial will take time to be concluded, this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed by that Court in this regard during the pendency of trial.

It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 480(3) of BNSS.

Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.

C.C. as per rules.