GULABSINGH KIRANSINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed praying for an order of regular bail post submission of charge-sheet under Sec. 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (for short 'the Atrocities Act') in connection with the FIR registered at C.R.No.11207036200584 of 2020 registered with Kalol Police Station, District - Panchmahals, for the alleged offences punishable under Ss. 363 , 366 , 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code as also under Ss. 4 , 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short 'POCSO Act' and under Ss. 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) , 3(2) (v-a) and 3(2)(v) of 'the Atrocities Act'.

(2.) Heard Ms. Nidhi Barot, learned advocate for the appellant. She has submitted that the applicant is aged about 25 years who is unmarried and working in a company known as "Panchmahal Plastic" together with the victim and her family members, and there they developed relationship. It is further submitted that not only they developed relationship which was known to her family members also and her mother was not happy with the said relationship, and therefore, she threatened her of beating and pursuant thereto, according to statement of victim herself recorded on 2/7/2020, she insisted the appellant to join her company or else she would commit suicide. Pursuant to said threat being given by her, the appellant joined her company and they stayed together for brief period of about 4-5 days and there they had ofcourse physical relationship and victim in her statement stated that it was against her consent. However, she has further submitted that victim is more than 16 years of age having relationship with the appellant and despite her assertion that physical relationship was against her consent, she refused medical examination when taken to the hospital on 2/7/2020 and she has not uttered a word about either any physical relationship or any action of the appellant without consent in respect of it. Thus, she has submitted that even if it is presumed that the appellant has committed an offence under Sec. 376 of IPC as also under the POCSO Act, the appellant be released on bail when investigation into it is over and he is in custody since 7/7/2020.

(3.) As against that, Ms. C.M.Shah, learned APP as also Ms. Khushbu Vyas, learned advocate for respondent No.2 - original complainant submitted that when it is clear in the statement of the victim that against her consent, the appellant entered into physical relationship where the victim is aged about 16 years and two months, the offence can be said to have committed rendering the appellant liable for the punishment, and therefore, the appellant should be refused bail.