Durgesh Puri vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 916 Chatt

                                           1




                                                                             NAFR
              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                          MCRC No. 10360 of 2022
    Durgesh Puri S/o Raghunath Puri Aged About 24 Years R/o Village
     Bhaskura, Police Station Gaurela, Tahsil - Pendraroad, District - Gaurela -
     Pendra - Marwahi Chhattisgarh

                                                                     ---- Applicant

                                     Versus

    State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station
     Gaurela, District - Gaurela - Pendra - Marwahi Chhattisgarh


                                                              ---- Non-Applicant

     For the Applicant                 :       Mr. Ashok Soni, Advocate
     For Non-Applicant                 :       Mr. G.P. Kurrey, P. L.



                Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
                             Order On Board
13.02.2023

   1.

The applicant has preferred the first bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he is in jail since 29.05.2022 in connection with Crime No.394/2022 registered at Police Station- Gaurela, District- Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376/34 of Indian Penal.

2. Case of the prosecution in brief, is that the complainant lodged a missing report in police station Gaurela, stating that her daughter is missing. During the course of investigation her daughter returned to her house, the police recorded her statement u/s 161 and 164 CRPC wherein she stated that the applicant had taken to Hyderabad where he developed relationship with her thereafter said offence has been registered against the present applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence. He submits that the age of the prosecutrix is doubtful she appears to be major and it is not a case where she was forcefully taken from her home to Sikandrabad. She willingly went with the preset applicant to Sikandrabad where she was working and staying at her own choice with him and thereafter she came back also with the present applicant and she has also been examined before the trial Court and her statement does not inspire confidence. He reliance upon the judgment of Bombay High Court in

Faizan Wahid Baid Vs. The State of Maharashta, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction bail application No. 3372 of 2021 vide order dated 15.11.2022 and submits that the conduct of the prosecutrix is a relevant fact. He further submits that he is in jail since since 29.05.2022 and trial may take some time. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide all the conditions and directions, which may be imposed by this Court therefore, the applicant may be granted bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits looking to the nature of allegation, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the nature of allegation, period of detention applicant is in jail since 29.05.2022 and trial may take some time, placing reliance on the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Faizan Wahid Baid Vs. The State of Maharashta (Supra), I am inclined to allow this bail application. Accordingly, this application is allowed.

7. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that -

a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

c) He is restrained from meeting with prosecution witnesses till conclusion of trial.

8. It is made clear that the observations made herein above is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, without being influenced by any observations made herein above. It is also made clear that the victim/complainant or State is at liberty to move an application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicant in the event of applicant involving himself in similar offence in future or violates any of the above conditions.

9. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

                                                 (Sachin Singh Rajput)
  vaishali                                               Judge