Chattisgarh High Court
Kumar Dhruw vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 April, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:17101
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2026 of 2025
1 - Kumar Dhruw S/o Ganesh Ram Dhruw Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Akoli
P.S. Bhatapara Gramin District - Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Applicant
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station D.D. Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
15/04/2025
1. This is the third bail application. The second bail application was
dismissed on merits vide order dated 11.03.2024 in M.Cr.C. No.
1738/2024.
2. This bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he
has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 568/2022 registered at
Police Station – D.D. Nagar, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 (3), 376 (2) (n) of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 06 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
3. Case of prosecution is that, the applicant abducted the minor girl/victim
and on the pretext of marriage have committed sexual intercourse with
SHUBHAM
DEY
Digitally
signed by
SHUBHAM
DEY
2
her. Mother of the vicitm lodged report in the concerned police station
stating that her daughter was found missing, based upon which, initially
crime was registered for offfence under Section 363 of I.P.C. During the
course of investigation, victim was recovered & after recording her
statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. other offences were also
added and applicant was arrested on 07.12.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent,
he has been falsely implicated in the crime. He has not committed any
offence as alleged. He submits that this application is filed on the ground
of delay in trial. Applicant is in jail since 07.12.2022, till December, 2024
only 04 witness have been examined and as per the information received
from the learned counsel at Trial Court, even today, only 04 witnesses
have been examined. Applicant has already completed more than 02
years of the pre-trial detention. He also pointed out that there is no other
criminal antecedent against the applicant. Victim and her mother has
been examined before the learned Trial Court as such, there is no
apprehension of influencing the material witnesses. Hence, he may be
enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the
submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit
that there are specific allegations leveled against the applicant in the
statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the
Cr.P.C. He also submits that the victim in her statement has supported
the case of prosecution.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the age of
the victim to be below 18 years is not proved before the learned Trial
Court in accordance with law. From the statement of the victim, it is
appearing that she was a consenting party.
3
7. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, victim along with her mother
is present before this Court through virtual mode from D.L.S.A. Raipur
and they submit that they are having no objection in grant of bail to the
applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
9. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of
allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties and
further considering that the applicant has already suffered 02 years of
pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I
am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.
10. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that
applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction
of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that:
(a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek
any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are
present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial
court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with
law.
(b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed,
either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without
sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial andin order to
secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and
the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such
proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the
dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording
of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court
absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall
be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and
proceed against him in accordance with law.
4
11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified
copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey