Monesh Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6991 MP

                             1
         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  MCRC No.53559/2021
           Monesh Pathak vs. State of M.P. & Anr.

Gwalior, Dated : 28.10.2021

      Shri Sushil Goswami, Counsel for the applicant.

      Shri    A.K.     Nirankari,    Public     Prosecutor     for   the

respondent/State.

Case diary is not available. Accordingly, the bail application is

being decided on the basis of the averments made in the application

as well as facts mentioned in the impugned order.

This sixth application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been

filed for grant of bail. The fifth application was dismissed by order

dated 10.8.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.38099/2021.

The applicant has been arrested on 20.12.2020 in connection

with Crime No.230/2020 registered at Police Station Civil Line,

District Datia for offence under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 376(2)(N)

of IPC and under Section 5L/6 of the POCSO Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

prosecutrix has been examined and although she has stated that she

had gone along with the applicant to Gujrat but she has also stated

that they never had physical relationship.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the respondent/State. It is submitted that it is not the case

of the applicant that the prosecutrix had gone along with him without

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.53559/2021 Monesh Pathak vs. State of M.P. & Anr.

any inducement on his part and in the light of the judgment passed by

the Supreme Court in the case of Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh

Zala Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2021) 3 SCC 12, prima facie

case under Sections 363, 366 of IPC has been made out. Further the

DNA test report has not been received so far. It is further submitted

that Dr. Neelam Mandeliya (PW-5) has specifically stated that it was

disclosed by the prosecutrix that she was residing with a boy for the

last five months and was having physical relationship with her.

Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the

parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made

out for grant of bail. The application fails and is hereby dismissed.

However, liberty is granted to revive the prayer after receipt of DNA

test report.

The Trial Court is directed to make every endeavor to conclude

the trial as early as possible.

                                                             (G.S. Ahluwalia)
(alok)                                                             Judge




ALOK KUMAR
2021.10.28 17:36:34 +05'30'