ARYAN SIRIS GARANGE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent - State. FACTS

(2.) By way of the present application under Sec. 4 38 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191040220265 of registered with Sardarnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad City, District Ahmedabad for the offences under Ss. 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) as well as Sec. 4, 6, and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

(3.) The case of the prosecution in brief, as narrated in the FIR, is that an FIR came to be filed by one Sunitaben w/o. Chandubhai Nanakram Sehzadpuri, aged about 41 years, inter alia, contending that she is residing at the address stated in the FIR with her family and she is a housewife, while her husband is a businessman running a food stall at Revdi Bazaar. It is further stated that she is having two children - son, Santosh, aged 18 years, who is studying in 10th Std. and a daughter, prosecutrix, who is aged 15 years 07 months and 2 9 days and is studying in the 10th Std. It is alleged that on 14/1/2022 as Uttarayan celebrations were underway, she got suspicious on her daughter and inquired about the same wherein she admitted her relationship with the applicant since one and half years ago. It is alleged that the applicant coerced her to meet again and again. It is alleged that around one year ago (from the date of filing of the present FIR), the applicant had forced the prosecutrix to meet him outside her society and on the same day, at around 7 p.m., the applicant took her to an open ground in the Naroda GIDC where the applicant, had forced her to have physical relationship and again after one and half months, without her wish, she was forced to have such relationship, and lastly she had physical relations, around last Diwali also. It is alleged that during the last act, the applicant had promised her to marry her and on such wrong pretext, he developed physical relationship. It is alleged that every time the victim resisted the act, the applicant used to threaten her by saying that he will inform her parents regarding their relationship. It is alleged that later on, the first informant consulted her family members whether to file a complaint regarding the incident or not, due to which some delay occurred and later on with these allegations the aforesaid FIR came to be filed against the applicant on 29/1/2022. SUBMISSIONS