AAFTAB ABDUL KARIM MANJOTHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Darshan Varandani appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned APP Mr. L. B. Dabhi for the respondent State.

(2.) By way of this appeal filed under Sec. 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant - accused seeks to be released on regular bail in connection with F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. 11993003211309 of 2021 registered with Anjar Police Station, Kachchh on 15/10/2021 for offences punishable under Ss. 376(2)(n) , 114 of IPC, under Ss. 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989, and under Sec. 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr.Varandani on behalf of the appellant would submit that the FIR inter alia alleges that the prosecutrix was in friendly term with one Lokesh Sharma from whom the appellant got introduced to the present prosecutrix and whereas thereafter it is alleged that the present appellant and the prosecutrix had a relationship and whereas the present appellant taking advantage of the same had entered into physical relations with the prosecutrix and also recorded such incident in his mobile phone. Learned Advocate for the appellant would submit that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer had recorded further statement of the prosecutrix and whereas from the said statement it would appear that it is the other person referred to herein above i.e. Lokesh Sharma, who was having a relation with the prosecutrix and whereas it would also appear that the video clip had been recorded by Lokesh Sharma and the present appellant had, in fact, helped the prosecutrix in deleting the video clip recorded by Lokesh Sharma. It also appears that the prosecutrix had few days prior to the filing of the FIR gone in search of the present appellant and whereas the present appellant, in fact, informed parents of the prosecutrix about her presence and whereas according to the learned Advocate, the further statement also reflects that the prosecutrix under pressure of her parents had filed the FIR. Learned Advocate for the appellant would submit that having regard to such fact clearly being made out this Court may release the present appellant on regular bail, more particularly considering the fact that the appellant had been arrested on 16/10/2021 and the Investigating Officer had filed the charge-sheet on 2/12/2021.