Bail granted on the basis of time lapse of 3 months in filing a complaint
[Bandhan Jagte v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2018 SCC OnLine Chh 390; dated 05.04.2018]
The Single Judge Bench comprising of Arvind Singh Chandel, J., granted regular bail to an offender charged under Sections 366, 376(2) (n), 342/34 of the Penal Code.
The brief facts of the case are that the prosecutrix had lodged a complaint against the applicant who had forcibly asked her to marry him and later when the prosecutrix went to complain about the same, she was taken by her brother-in-law (co-accused) to a lodge where she stayed along with him where he committed rape with her and it continued. Later on, it was discovered on the collection of some information that the applicant was already married.
CONTENTIONS OF THE APPLICANT
The submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was falsely implicated in the case as the prosecutrix was a consenting party in the present case and taking due reference through these submissions he has prayed for bail of the applicant.
The Hon’ble High Court on taking due consideration from the facts and circumstances of the case along with the contention of the applicant’s counsel, observed that the prosecutrix being a major girl had on her own will stayed with the applicant at the lodge and the crux of the case is that she took 3 months to lodge the complaint against the same
The court concluded its order on the same by granting bail to the applicant as the trial would take some time and till that time he is allowed to be released on bail. [Bandhan Jagte v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2018 SCC OnLine Chh 390; dated 05.04.2018]