NAYAK KIRANKUMAR ARVINDBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties through video conferencing.

(2.) This application is filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for regular bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.I-40 of 2019 with Kheralu Police Station, District Mahesana for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 4, 5 (l), 6, 8, and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

(3.) Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are vague and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has further submitted that the applicant has been arrested on 27.08.2020 and has been incarcerated since then. He has also submitted that the material collected by the investigating agency during the course of the entire investigation does not even prima facie connect the present applicant. He has further submitted that the victim girl voluntarily asked the applicant to take her away from her house as her father wanted to get her married with someone else out of force. He has further submitted that it is pertinent to note that a statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code is required to be recorded before a First Class Judicial Magistrate, but no such exercise has been undertaken by the investigating agency. He has further submitted that the victim girl and the applicant have started living as husband and wife after having wedded legally as per the Hindu Marriage Act and, therefore, no case of Section 376 of the IPC can be alleged against the applicant. He has further submitted that it is a case of love affair which has culminated into their marriage legally.