Haribhai @ Appo @ Choti Raghubhai … vs State Of Gujarat on 4 December, 2017

R/CR.MA/28807/2017 ORDER



STATE OF GUJARAT….Respondent(s)

MR RAXIT J DHOLAKIA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV TRIVEDI APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1


Date : 04/12/2017


1. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned
APP for the respondent State.

2. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with F.I.R.
being C.R.No.I-78 of 2017 registered with Wadhwan police
station for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366
and 376 of the IPC and u/s 3(a), 4 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that
the applicant and the prosecutrix were in love with each other
and the prosecutrix accompanied the applicant of her own and
thereby, abandoned the guardianship of her parents

4. Learned APP, while opposing the application, has
submitted that at the relevant time, the prosecutrix was aged

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Tue Dec 05 02:53:50 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/28807/2017 ORDER

17 years 04 months. She being the minor, the question of
consent does not arise and therefore, the offence u/s 376 read
with POCSO Act has been committed and therefore, the
applicant may not be enlarged on bail.

5. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties in great detail and perused the records.

6. This is an unusual case of boy and girl having affair. As
the prosecutrix was minor, the applicant is sent behind prison
because of the complaint lodged by the complainant.
Undoubtedly, a minor girl is to be protected under law as there
are number of instances of sexual abuses of minor girls and
therefore, there is a special legislation of POCSO in the year
2012 and amendment in sections 375 and 376 of the IPC in
2014. The judiciary takes a very serious note of sexual
offences against women and specially against minor girls.
Upon reading of the statement of the prosecutrix, they both
eloped. Further, the trial Court rejected bail application mainly
on the ground that the girl is minor and her consent is

7. In the present case, the prosecutrix is 17 years 04
months and the accused is 26 years old. It appears from the
record and the statement of the prosecutrix that the
prosecutrix was in love with the applicant and left the home of
her own and moved with the applicant at various places.
These are the mitigating factors and therefore, present
application deserves consideration.

8. Hence, the application is allowed and the applicant is
ordered to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.I-78 of

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Tue Dec 05 02:53:50 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/28807/2017 ORDER

2017 registered with Wadhwan police station on executing a
bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one
surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
and subject to the conditions that the applicant shall;

[a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse

[b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of
the prosecution;

[c] not leave the territory of India without prior
permission of the Sessions Judge concerned;

[d] appear before the Investigation Officer
concerned, as and when required for
investigation purpose and attend the Court
concerned regularly.

[e] furnish the present address of residence along
with the proof to the I.O. concerned and also
to the Court at the time of execution of the
bond and shall not change the residence
without prior permission of Sessions Court

9. The competent authority will release the applicant only if
the applicant is not required in connection with any other
offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above
conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be
free to take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be
executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the
case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify
and/or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with
law. At the trial, the trial court shall not be influenced by the
observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this
stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail.

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Tue Dec 05 02:53:50 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/28807/2017 ORDER

10. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.

(S.H.VORA, J.)

Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Tue Dec 05 02:53:50 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *