Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sheikh Ayaz Mintu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2021
Author: Akhil Kumar Srivastava
1 MCRC-24233-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-24233-2021
(SHEIKH AYAZ MINTU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
5
Jabalpur, Dated : 28-06-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri R.S. Sidiqi, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri A. Patel, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.
Shri Nitin Karan, learned counsel for the objector.
Case diary is available with the learned Panel Lawyer.
Case diary perused.
Heard on I.A. No.11054/2021.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and
the documents are taken on record.
T his is first bail application filed by the applicant/accused under
Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail, who is in custody since
16.04.2021 in connection with Crime No.289/2021 registered at Police Station
Gohalpur District Jabalpur for the offences under Sections 376 (2) (n) and
506 of IPC.
It is alleged that applicant has developed friendship and thereafter, on
the pretext of marriage has committed sexual intercourse upon the
prosecutrix. On the basis of aforesaid offence has been registered against
him.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated. He has not committed any offence. It is
submitted that family members had gone to the house of prosecutrix for the
purpose of marriage between the applicant and prosecutrix but the family
members refused to marry with the applicant and thereafter, false report has
been lodged against the applicant. The applicant was always ready to marry
with the prosecutrix and even today he is ready to marry with her, but the
Signature Not prosecutrix herself refused to marry with her. The applicant is in custody
SAN
Verified
Digitally signed by
PRASHANT
BAGJILEWALE
Date: 2021.06.29
18:20:40 IST
2 MCRC-24233-2021
since 16.04.2021 and due to Covid-19 Pandemic, the trial would take
considerable time to conclude. The applicant is permanent resident of the
District Jabalpur and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with
the prosecution evidence by the applicant. In support of his argumetns he
relied on the judgment of the apex Court in the matter of Sonu @ Subhash
Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors, in Cr. Appeal No.233 of
2021. In view of the aforesaid, prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on
regular bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application.
Learned counsel for the Objector has vehemently opposes the prayer
for bail. He submits that in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C., she has specifically mentioned the conduct and act
of the applicant. The applicant and prosecurtrix were in love and affairs since
last four years. The applicant on the pretext of marriage committed sexual
intercourse upon the prosecutrix on various occasions and when the
prosecutrix insisted for marriage the applicant refused to marry and
threatened to kill her. The applicant has criminal background and looking to
the past conduct of the applicant, the prosecurix is not ready to marry with
him. With these submissions prayed to dismiss the application.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the entire
material available in the file.
Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case, nature
of allegations and evidence and the fact that conclusion of the trial would take
time, hence, without commenting on the merits of the matter, the application
i s allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his
furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand)
with one surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned
Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be
fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.
The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance with the
3 MCRC-24233-2021
order passed by the Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition(C) No. 1/2020
and ensure, that the Applicant is examined by the jail doctor before his
release. If applicant shows symptoms of COVID 19, the doctor shall
forthwith direct him to be produced before the appropriate hospital
designated for the detection and treatment of COVID 19 patients. If the
doctor is of the opinion that the Applicants is/are not affected with the virus,
the jail authorities shall ensure their transportation from the jail till his/their
place of residence.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following
conditions by the applicants :-
1.
The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by him;
2. The applicants will cooperate in the trial;
3. The applicants 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 Officer,
as the case may be;
4. The applicants shall not commit any offence during the entire period
of bail.
5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the
trial;
6. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of
the trial Court;
7. The applicants shall inform the Court about their address and
residence in case the applicants moves out from his permanent address for
any point of time; and
8. The applicants shall not contact any of the other accused persons in
this case in any manner whatsoever.
This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial, but in case of
bail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become
4 MCRC-24233-2021
ineffective and cancelled without reference to this Bench.
In the event of breach of any of the conditions imposed by this Court,
the complainant/victim/State will be at liberty to move an application for
cancellation of bail granted today.
Certified Copy on payment of usual charges.
(AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE
pb
