ROOP DUTT SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The bail applicant, is, suffering judicial incarceration, for, his allegedly committing offences constituted under Sections 363, 366, and, Section 376 of the IPC, and, for his allegedly committing offences, embodied in Sections 4, 7 and 16 of the POCSO Act, in respect whereo, FIR No. 7 of 2018 of 8.02.2018, is lodged with Women Police Station, Baddi.

(2.) The prosecutrix, has, solemnised marriage with the bail applicant, and, in her sworn affidavit, she has made a disclosure qua hers, at the relevant time, being a major. The marriage certificate, qua the solemnisation, of, marriage inter se the bail applicant, and, the prosecutrix also elborates therein qua the prosecutrix, at the relevant time, being, a, major. However, in case, the aforesaid material is imputed sanctity, thereupon, the offences allegedly committed by the bail application, would prima facie, be hence construable to be with the consent of the prosecutrix, (I) dehors, in her statement, recorded, under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned, she ascribes, vis-a-vis, the bail applicant, an, incriminatory role, qua his, on, 8.02018, subjecting her, to, forcible sexual intercourse.

(3.) However, before proceeding to mete credence, to the aforesaid disclosures, unfolded, in the affidavit sworn, by the prosecutrix, and, in the apt marriage certificate, (a) it is necessary, to, bear in mind, the further factum of the MLC, appertaining, to the prosecutrix, contrarily unfolding therein, qua the prosecutrix being aged 15 years, and, also the school leaving certificate, appertaining to the prosecution, also, alike therewith unraveling, qua the prosecutrix, at the relevant time, being a minor.