Smt. Reena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1368 MP

                                                            1

             THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        MCRC No.18516/2021
                  (SMT. REENA VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Gwalior dtd. 07/04/2021
      Shri Ankur Maheshwari, learned counsel for the applicant

through video conferencing.

      Shri Rohit Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.

      Case diary is available.

      This second repeat application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

has been filed by the applicant for grant of bail.

      The applicant has been arrested on 14/12/2020 in connection

with Crime No.309/2020 registered at Police Station Bagchini,

Distt. Morena for offence under Sections 376-D, 366, 342, 120-B,

370, 372 and 373 of IPC.

      It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the first

bail application was dismissed by order dated 18/01/2021 passed in

MCRC No.1122/2021 with liberty to revive the prayer after charge-

sheet is filed. It is submitted that the police after concluding the

investigation has filed the charge-sheet. The allegations are that the

prosecutrix is resident of Jabalpur and works alongwith Caterers for

preparing food in the parties. The co-accused Ram Kishan @

Nanna was known to her who informed that a VIP waitress is

required at Dholpur and, therefore, she may go there. On the

information given by co-accused Ram Kishan @ Nanna, the

prosecutix came to Narsinghpur, where she met with co-accused
                                                               2

Ram Kishan @ Nanna. She came to Dholpur alongwith co-accused

Ram Kishan @ Nanna by train where the co-accused Ram Kishan

@ Nanna handed over the prosecutrix to one person, who brought

her to the house of the applicant. The applicant in her turn handed

over the prosecutrix to one Rahul, who allegedly committed rape on

her for three or four times. The uncle to whom the prosecutrix was

handed over by Ram Kishan @ Nanna also committed rape on her.

On one day after getting an opportunity, she succeeded to run away

from the hut and informed the police. It is submitted by the counsel

for the applicant that even if the entire allegations are accepted,

then it is clear that the applicant is an innocent person and under

bonafide belief she allowed her to go with Rahul because Rahul

was in the business of Catering. It is further submitted that there is

no allegation that the applicant was in any manner involved in

purchase or sale of the prosecutrix. The duration of stay of the

prosecutrix with the applicant is few hours. The trial is likely to

take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of her

absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.

      Per contra, the application is opposed by the counsel for the

respondent/State. However, after going through the police case

diary, it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and

without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is

allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on

furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One

Lac Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of

the Trial Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court on the

dates given by the concerned Court.

This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in

case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in

the case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on

18/03/2021 in Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation

regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant.

Certified copy as per rule.

                                                              (G.S.Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                            Judge


         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         2021.04.08
         15:36:55 -07'00'