High Court: Bail application to be rejected, if any inculpatory evidence not recorded by Prosecution[Read Order]

In the recent order passed, by the  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH in the case of Kadar Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh by HON’BLE Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, the application for bail was rejected at the very first bail application filed by the applicant been arrested under  Sections 363, 366, 376-D, 506 of IPC and under Sections 5-G & 6 of POCSO Act.

The matter was heard through video conferencing and was delayed because of the COVID 19 pandemic outbreak. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the last date of hearing, it was directed by this Court to produce the mark sheet of the prosecutrix, but due to present COVID-19 condition, he is not able to produce the certified copy of mark sheet of the prosecutrix. On the date of the incident, the age of the prosecutrix was more than 18 years and as per the statement given under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the case is of full consent. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C., no adverse evidence against the present applicant has been given by the prosecutrix. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer and has submitted that the present applicant is the main accused of this case. There are two mark sheets of prosecutrix available on record wherein date of birth of the prosecutrix has been mentioned differently. There is no progress in the trial due to the present COVID-19 condition.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected the bail application with the liberty to the applicant to file a fresh application after the recording of evidence of prosecution witnesses and directed the Trial Court to proceed further in these types of cases.

Read Order@LatestLaws