The Allahabad High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan granted bail to a rape accused in a Protection of Children Against Sexual Offences (POCSO) case on the condition that he marries the victim within fifteen days of his release. (Monu v. State of UP)
Facts of the case
The anticipatory bail application was filed by the present applicant (Amarjeet) apprehending his arrest in FIR registered under Sections 363, 366 & 376 I.P.C. and Section 7 & 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO).
Contention of the Parties
The counsel for the applicant submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).
The attention was also drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. which was initially lodged under Sections 363 & 366 I.P.C., however during investigation, Section 376 I.P.C. and Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO Act have been added.
The counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant was in love affairs with the prosecutrix and both got married. It was submitted that as per the date of birth of the prosecutrix on the date of marriage she was about 18 years. However, at the time of lodging F.I.R. she was about 17 years, 11 months and 07 days. He has further submitted that the present applicant and the prosecutrix are living together and the prosecutirx has got no grievance of any kind whatsoever against the present applicant. However, mother of the prosecutrix has lodged the impugned F.I.R.
Sri Aditya Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 also submitted that the submission of learned counsel for the applicant to the effect that both are married and living together is correct. He also submitted that the prosecutrix has got no grievance of any kind whatsoever against the present applicant. However, the F.I.R. has been lodged by mother of the prosecutrix.
The learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that at the time of marriage, the victim was not major, therefore, the relevant Sections of POCSO Act and Section 376 I.P.C. have been added against him. He has also submitted that pursuant to the F.I.R. the investigation is going on.
On that, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant is aware about the fact that investigation is going on and he is willing to participate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if so granted.
Courts observation and Judgment
The bench taking note of the contention of the parties remarked, “his liberty may be protected till completion of investigation or till filing of the police report/ charge-sheet under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the material available on record, the contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the undisputed fact by the parties that the applicant and the proscutrix got married and are living happily together, investigation is going on and the undertaking of the present applicant that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall never misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected till completion of the investigation or till filing of the police report/ charge-sheet under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C.”
The bench further referred to the Apex Court judgment in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
The bench granting anticipatory bail to the accused remarked, “Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant (Amarjeet) shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number, till completion of investigation, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:-
that the present applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 18.10.2022 at 11:00 a.m. sharp to co-operate in the investigation and he shall further co-operate in the investigation as per direction of the Investigating Officer relating to the investigation, failing which, the benefit of this order shall not be extended to the present applicant and the Investigating Officer/ Competent Court would be at liberty to take any coercive steps against the present applicant, strictly in accordance with law.”
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
