High CourtsSingle Bench

Sonu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 October 2019 · Citation: (2019) 10 MP CK 0056

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohd. Fahim Anwar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 161, 164, 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366(A), 376(2)(N), 506 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — Section 5(L), 6
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 39536 Of 2019
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

9 paragraphs · 439 words

This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant.

The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.272/2019, registered at Police Station Rehli, District Sagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(2)(N), 506 of IPC and section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act.

The case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night of 27-28/05/2019, prosecutrix aged about 17 years 5 months was disappeared from her residential house situated at village Kelvas under the jurisdiction of Police Station Rehli. Report in this regard has been lodged by father of the prosecutrix. On that basis, Crime No.272/2019 under Section 363 of the IPC has been registered against unknown person. During the course of investigation, prosecutrix was recovered on 25/07/2019. Her medical examination was conducted. Her statements under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. have been recorded. Statements of her family members have also been recorded. On that basis, Section 366(A) and 376(2)(N), 506 of IPC and section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act has been added in the crime already registered and the applicant and co-accused has been arrested.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent young boy of 22 years and has been falsely implicated. The applicant is in custody since 5.9.2019. There is no allegation that the applicant had taken the prosecutrix or the prosecutrix was recovered from his possession. The trial will take a long time to conclude. It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

Learned counsel for State has opposed the application for bail.

There is no allegation of sexual assault on the prosecutrix by the applicant, but the only allegation is that he was accompanying the co-accused Prashant @ Dabbu when the co-accused was taking the prosecutrix from Khairana to Gourjhamar. The applicant is a young boy of 22 years. He is in judicial custody since 5.9.2019.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant Sonu, shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant shall abide by the conditions as enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. and in the event of breach of condition of bail, the trial Court will be competent to take coercive action against the applicant.

This M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

C.C. as per rules.