Neta @ Sunil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1420 MP

                 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH                      1
                         CRA No. 2479 of 2021
                  Neta alias Sunil vs. State of MP and Anr.

                    Heard through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 08/04/2021

        Shri Prem Singh Bhadauria, counsel for the appellant.

        Shri Rohit Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1/ State.

None for the complainant.

It is submitted by the Counsel for the State that the complainant has

been informed about the pendency of this appeal, as required under Section

15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act.

Case Diary is available.

This appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order

dated 22/03/2021 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST, Prevention of Atrocities

Act), rejecting the bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of

CrPC.

The appellant has been arrested on 22/02/2021 in connection with Crime

No.86/2018, registered by Police Station:Station Road, District Morena for

offence punishable under Sections 366, 376(D), 506 of IPC and under Sections

3 (2)(v-a), 3(1)(w)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

It is submitted by the Counsel for the appellant that multiple statements

of the prosecutrix under Section 161 of CrPC and under Section 164 of CrPC

CRA No. 2479 of 2021 Neta alias Sunil vs. State of MP and Anr.

were recorded. According to the prosecution case, on 10/02/2018, the

prosecutrix left her house to watch Gwalior Mela without informing any of her

relatives. In Gwalior Mela, she met with the co-accused Ravindra, who took

her to a room where it is alleged that he committed rape on her. Thereafter, on

the information given by Ravindra, the present appellant and other co-accused

persons came on the spot and committed rape on the prosecutrix. It is further

submitted that on the next date, the prosecutrix was taken away by other co-

accused persons and was detained for few days. It is submitted that according

to the prosecution case, except the allegations of committing rape on

10/02/2018, there is no other allegation that the appellant had ever met with

the prosecutrix. It is further submitted that it is clear from the statement which

was recorded under Section 161 of CrPC on 15/6/2018, the prosecutrix was

having her mobile with her on 10/02/2018, which according to her, was taken

away by the co-accused on 11/02/2018. It is further submitted that if the

prosecutrix was gang raped by the appellant and other co-accused persons,

then she could have informed her parents or relatives on mobile but that was

not done. It is further submitted that it appears that the appellant has been

falsely implicated. Further, co-accused Ravindra alias Rabbo and Bablu alias

Balua were tried and in the said trial, the prosecutrix has turned hostile and did

not support the prosecution case and accordingly, the co-accused Ravindra and

Bablu have been acquitted. It is submitted that although the evidence led in the

trial during the absence of the appellant cannot be read but the fact that the

CRA No. 2479 of 2021 Neta alias Sunil vs. State of MP and Anr.

prosecutrix did not inform her parents about the commission of gang rape in

spite of the fact that she was having her mobile during the entire night on

10/02/2018, makes the story very doubtful. It is further submitted that under

these circumstances, the circumstance of remaining out of clutches of the

prosecution for the last three years may be ignored. The trial is likely to take

sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or

tampering with the prosecution case.

Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by the Counsel for the

State. It is submitted that the offence was committed in the month of February,

2018 whereas the appellant has been arrested on 22 nd February, 2021 i.e. after

three years.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without

commenting on the merits of the case, the appeal is allowed. It is directed that

the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees 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 18/3/2021 in Criminal

Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of bail be sent to the

CRA No. 2479 of 2021 Neta alias Sunil vs. State of MP and Anr.

complainant.

Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge MKB

MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK 2021.04.09 14:45:32 +05'30'