Rajit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2506 MP

                                   1

         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          CRA No.3551/2021
                  (RAJIT VS. STATE OF M.P. & ANR.)

                      Through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 17/06/2021

      Shri P.S.Bhadauriya, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri R.K.Awasthi, learned counsel for the State.

      None for the respondent No.2/ complainant.

Heard finally, through video conferencing.

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 second repeat appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2)

of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act against the order dated 11/07/2020 passed by Special

Judge, Atrocities, Bhind rejecting the bail application.

The appellant has been arrested on 04/11/2019 in connection

with Crime No.166/2019 registered by Police Station Malanpur,

District Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A,

376(1) of IPC, Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short "SC/ST

Act") and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act.

This repeat appeal has been filed on the ground of delay in

trial. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that according to

the prosecution case, the date of birth of the prosecutrix is

20/06/2002. On 20/08/2019, she eloped with the applicant and FIR

was lodged on 23/08/2019. She was recovered on 04/11/2019 and

her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded on

05/11/2019. The prosecutrix and all other material witnesses have

been examined. Since, they have supported the prosecution case,

therefore, now there is no possibility of tampering or winning over

the prosecution witnesses. Only doctor and investigating officer are

yet to be examined. Due to Covid-19 pandemic there is a possibility

of further delay in trial.

Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by the counsel

for the State. It is submitted that the prosecutrix was minor and her

consent was immaterial as well as in the light of FSL report,

according to which human sperms were found in the vaginal slide of

the prosecutrix.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

In the light of the judgment dated 12/01/2021 passed by

Supreme Court in the case of Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh

Zala Vs. State of Gujarat in CRA No.1919/2010, coupled with the

fact that prosecutrix was minor and her consent is immaterial, as well

as considering that the trial has reached to an advanced stage, and the

F.S.L. report, no case is made out for grant of bail to the appellant.

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

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

PRINCEE BARAIYA 2021.06.18 10:33:32 -07'00'