Palash Samtani vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4585 MP

                                     1                         MCRC-32745-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  MCRC-32745-2021
                 (PALASH SAMTANI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


Jabalpur, Dated : 24-08-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Siddharth Datt,
learned counsel for the applicant.
      Shri Gopal Jaiswal, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.

Shri Dharmendra Singh Baghel, learned counsel for the objector.

This is repeat (second) bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail filed by the applicant. Earlier bail application was dismissed on merits on the ground of incomplete investigation vide order dated 07.05.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.18502/2021.

T he applicant is in jail since 26.03.2021 in connection with Crime No.60/2021 registered at Police Station-Tilwara, District-Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 506 and 201 of the IPC.

A s per prosecution case, on 11.02.2021, prosecutrix aged 25 years

lodged the FIR against the present applicant stating therein that on 01.02.2021, applicant took her at Tilwara by own EON car for wandering and after that he parked his car at Royal Arbit Hotel's parking where they took some french fries. Applicant also took some wine and cigarette in the car due to which prosecutrix felt uneasiness then she told him to leave her in the house then he took a room in the said hotel where she went with the applicant for relaxing. Applicant went out from the room and after sometime, he came there with wine and bluetooth speaker and locked the door and switch on the bluetooth speaker at high volumes. Thereafter when prosecutrix tried to leave the room then applicant slapped her and committed intercourse with her forcefully and also took her obscene photos. By showing her photos, applicant again committed intercourse with her and also threatened her. On 02.02.2021, prosecutrix and applicant left the hotel and applicant also 2 MCRC-32745-2021 dropped the prosecutrix to her house.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case whereas he did not commit any offence as alleged by prosecution. Only to extract the money from the applicant, prosecutrix has lodged the said complaint. In fact, prosecutrix has

also filed such type of case against other person, namely, Vikas Ram Rakhyani i.e. M.Cr.C.No.10461/2016 and after that, she compromised in the said matter and also solemnized marriage with the Vikas. She lived with Vikas as his wife for some time. Due to some quarrel arose between them, prosecutrix left her house and lodged the report against Vikas for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 498-A and 376 of the IPC. The prosecutrix and present applicant are known to each other for last 1 year. They started developing their friendship. Applicant has no knowledge that prosecurtix was married lady and when this fact came to the knowledge of the applicant, some dispute arose between them. As per the prosecution, prosecutrix voluntarily went with the present applicant for wandering at Tilwara. They took a room in Royal Arbit hotel and prosecutrix herself produced her ID and also signed in the register, so it is a matter of consent. No obscene video and concerned mobile were seized from the possession of present applicant. He submits that the applicant was doing private job and he never indulged in any criminal activity. The medical examiner did not give any definite opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse or rape with the prosecutrix. No injury was found on the body of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix used to trap the innocent persons for extracting money. He further submits that no material is available in the case diary to constitute the alleged offences against the present applicant. Without being carried out proper investigation, the police made him as an accused in the case. Besides the above, he submits that investigation is complete, charge-sheet has been filed and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 26.03.2021. Due to spread 3 MCRC-32745-2021 of COVID-19 pandemic, trial will take sufficient time in its conclusion. In support of his contention, he filed some judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court. With the aforesaid, he prays for allowing the said bail application.

On the other hand, learned P.L. for the respondent/State opposes the same.

Learned counsel for the objector also opposes the said application submitting that prosecutrix and present applicant are friends and known to each other for last 1 year, therefore, she trusted the applicant, so she went with the applicant at Tilwara where applicant committed intercourse with her forcefully and also threatened her. Present applicant and his family members are influential persons and threatening the prosecutrix and her family members

to withdraw the said complaint. In this regard, she has also filed a complaint to the concerning authority. Applicant has not co-operated in the investigation and intentionally not produced his mobile phone for seizure and lodged a false case of lost of his mobile. Due to non-cooperation of the applicant, police has increased the offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC against him.

Heard and perused the case diary.

Considering the contention of both the parties and this fact that prosecutrix is well educated lady and doing job at paytm, it is also appears on record that prosecutrix was residing with the one Vikas as his wife for sometime but some dispute arose between them then she was residing separately from Vikas, prosecutrix and present applicant are known to each other for last 1 year, prosecutrix voluntarily went with the present applicant at Tilwara for wandering, the medical examiner did not opine any definite opinion regarding recent sexual intercourse or rape with the prosecutrix, there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, photos and videos were also not seized from the possession of present applicant, when applicant taking room in the said hotel, prosecutrix herself produced her ID and also signed in the register, applicant has no previous criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 26.03.2021, 4 MCRC-32745-2021 charge sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial will take time, applicant is bread earner of his family, it is the time of COVID-19, Pandemic, so conclusion of trial will take long time, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, therefore, it would not be appropriate to keep the accused/applicant in jail during whole the trial, hence, without commenting on merits of the case, application of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that applicant- Palash Samtani be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac Only) with two solvent sureties of amount of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial;

3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officers;

4. The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the 5 MCRC-32745-2021 applicant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing. Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-

1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The applicant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the applicant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

Certified copy as per rules.

M.Cr.C. is disposed of.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

sp Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.08.27 17:50:47 +05'30'