Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2836 (CHH)

SUNDARLAL TULAVI ALIAS SUNDER v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/275/2025 · 2025-03-03

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:10402 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 275 of 2025 1 - Sundarlal Tulavi Alias Sunder S/o Ramcharan Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Borkanhar, P.S. Madanwada, District : Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Madanwada, District : Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Aniruddh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri G.L.Uikey, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma}) Order on Board 03/03/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 05/2023 registered at police station Madanwada, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(3) and 376(2)(n) 2 IPC and Section 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that report was lodged by the father of the prosecutrix alleging that his minor daughter has been allured by the applicant on the pretext of marriage and committed rape on her and she became pregnant. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that there was consensual relation between the applicant and the prosecutrix and that on the date of incident she was aged about 20 years. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 06.10.2023, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that the victim is minor aged about 14 years and two months, she became pregnant and had delivered a child. 6. Victim and her mother appeared through the concerned DLSA and have raised objection. 7. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. On due consideration of the rival submissions, from the records it prima facie appears that the applicant had forcefully committed rape on the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage, who is aged about 3 14 years and 2 months and she became pregnant, therefore looking to the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, his bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.05 11:18:25 +0530