Chattisgarh High Court
Ashish Kumar Das vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 July, 2022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 360 of 2022
Ashish Kumar Das S/o Shri Mukti Das Aged About 28 Years R/o
Jagriti Nagar, In Front Of New Shiv Mandir, Ramand Mandir
Ward, Police Station Mahila Thana, Tahsil And District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mahila Thana,
District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent
For the Applicant/s :- Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. Sushil Sahu, PL
For the Objector :- Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate
_______________________________________________________________
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput,
Order on Board
26.07.2022
1. This frst anticipatory bail application under Section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been fled by the
accused/applicant who is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Crime No. 46/2022 registered at Police Station
Mahila Thana, District Raipur, CG for the ofence punishable
under Section 376 and 376(2)(n) of IPC.
2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on the false
pretext of marriage the applicant has committed sexual
intercourse with the prosecutrix when he has denied for
marriage the prosecutrix made a complaint in Mahila Thana.
On the basis of said complaint crime has been registered
against the present applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant
has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in
the case. He further submits that she was his relationship with the
applicant for a period of three years. In view of the said fact if the
relationship is not working out the same cannot be a ground for
lodging in FIR for offences under Section 376 and 376(2)(n) of
IPC. He relied upon the order dated 14.07.2022 of Hon'ble
Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No. 962 of 2022
Ansar Mohammad Vs. State of Rajashthan and anothers and
he also relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in
(2020) 10 SCC 108. He lastly submits and he is ready to abide
by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this
Court and therefore, application may be allowed.
4. Learned State counsel and objector strongly opposes the
application for anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant
has committed a crime against the women and on the ground
of false pretext of marriage continuously he has committed
sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
looking to the relationship and age of the prosecutrix, this
Court fnds it to be a ft case for grant of anticipatory bail to
him. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed
that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the arresting ofcer, on the following
conditions:-
(a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the
case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court
or to any police officer,
(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to
fair and expeditious trial, and
(c) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar
nature in future.
(d) he shall appear before the concerned Police
Officer/Investigating Officer on 17.08.2022 and cooperate with
the investigation.
6. The observations made hereinabove is only for the
purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial will
decide the case on its own merit without being infuenced by
any observation made hereinabove. It is made clear that if any
of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the applicant, the
State would be free to move for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
Judge
Pawan
