Shoyab Hussain @ Goldy vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1899 Chatt

                                        -1-


                                                                             NAFR
           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            MCRC No. 5254 of 2021
      Shoyab Hussain @ Goldy, S/o Late Zakir Hussain, Aged About 23
       Years, R/o Atal Aawas, Ashok Nagar, B-2/08, Thana- Sarkanda, District-
       Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                     ---- Applicant
                                      Versus
      State Of Chhattisgarh, Through: Station House Officer, Police Station-
       Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur,
       Chhattisgarh
                                                                ----Non-applicant

For Applicant - Mr. Saurabh Dangi, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State - Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.
           Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant
                               Order on Board
23-08-2021


1.

Heard on the application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. This is

first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular

bail. The applicant has been arrested on 27-05-2021 in connection with Crime

No.82/2021 registered at P.S. - Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh for the

offence under Section 376, 363, 366 of the IPC and Section 4 and 6 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant, that the applicant has been

falsely implicated. He is in jail since 27-05-2021. The statement of the

prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. shows that she was a willing and

consenting party. Further, she was of age nearly about 18 years. Relying on

the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of S. Varadarajan

Vs. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942 it is submitted that the prosecutrix had

attained the age of discretion and she was well aware of the consequences

when she went in the company of the applicant and stayed with him for a long

duration. Therefore, there is no case present against the applicant. Hence, it is

prayed that he may be granted bail.

3. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application

submitting that the prosecutrix was minor and therefore, her willingness and

consent is immaterial. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 of

the Cr.P.C. clearly shows that she was sexually exploited by the applicant.

Hence, the application may be rejected.

4. Complainant Nafisa Begam is virtually present before this Court through

Help Desk of the High Court and she has strong objection in grant of bail to the

applicant.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. According to the prosecution case, there is allegation that this applicant

abducted the minor prosecutrix, kept her in his custody for some time and

continuously established physical relation with her knowing well that she was

incapable of giving consent for such relation being a minor.

7. Considered on the submissions. Looking to the admissions in the

statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. about her love

affair with the applicant and other circumstances, I feel inclined to allow this

application.

8. Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 439

of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the

applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum

of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the

concerned Court, for his appearance as and when directed.

9. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil