The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore while dealing with an application filed by the POCSO accused under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 granted bail to him on the ground that the name of the mother of the prosecutrix has been incorrectly recorded in the marksheet and the same makes her age doubtful.

A Single Bench of Justice Pranay Verma noted in this matter that the prosecutrix is alleged to be a minor and her parents at the time of lodging of the FIR and in 164 Cr.P.C. statements have stated that the age of the prosecutrix is 17 years based on her marksheet. The Bench further stated –

"Though in the scholar register her date of birth has been mentioned as 15.04.2008 but the name of the mother of the prosecutrix has been incorrectly recorded therein. The same thus makes it doubtful. In her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix stated to have on her own gone along with the applicant to different places and eventually to Delhi and having married him and having lived with him as his wife and having developed physical relationship with him willingly. She did not state that the applicant exercised any force upon her for the same. The said statement has been corroborated in her statement before the Court in which she has affirmed her marriage with the applicant."

Advocate Abhinav Dhanodkar appeared for the applicant while Government Advocate Hitendra Tripathi represented the State.

In the present case, the applicant was implicated for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (n) of the IPC & Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and was in custody since May 5, 2022. In the month of March, a complaint was lodged by the father of the prosecutrix as his minor daughter was missing and could not be traced out despite best efforts. The search was made and she was recovered from the custody of the applicant. Upon recording her statement, she had gone along with the applicant who committed rape on her. Hence, the applicant was arrested in this regard.

The High Court after hearing both parties opined that the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

The Court further directed, "… the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial. It is also directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) Cr.P.C."

Accordingly, the Court allowed the application and granted bail to the accused.

Cause Title - Nizam @ Nizamuddin v. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Click here to read/download the Order


Madhya Pradesh High CourtJustice Pranay VermaPOCSO Act

Swasti Chaturvedi