Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 October, 2021
Author: Anil Verma
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.11739/2021
(Anil S/o Rajulal Nayak Vs. State of M.P.)
-1-
Indore, dated 29/10/2021
Mr. A.K. Nahar, learned counsel for the applicant.
Ms. Harshlata Soni, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent / State.
This is Fifth application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed on
behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is implicated
in connection with Crime No.173/2019 registered at Police Station-
Piplia Mandi, District- Mandsaur (MP) for offence punishable
under Sections 376 (D), 363, 506, 323 and 325 of IPC and Section
5(G),6 of POCSO Act 2012. The applicant is in custody since
27.04.2019.
02. As per prosecution story, on 20.04.2019 at about 09.30 p.m.
while 16 years old minor prosecutrix went to attend a marriage
ceremony at her maternal uncle's home along with her mother at
village-Belara, co-accused persons Ganpat and Prabhu came there
and told her to show them the place of dinner then Ganpat pressed
her mouth with handkerchief due to which she became unconscious
then Ganpat and Prabhu took her to a place near temple at
Sabakheda where accused Anil Nayak also came there and then all
of the three accused persons committed rape upon her one by one
and threatened her that if she informs the incident to anybody, they
will kill her and her family members. The accused persons also
beat her with hands due to which she fell down on stone and
sustained injuries over her both of the wrists, left knee and thighs.
Other accused persons fled away from the spot. Due to fear of the
accused persons, she did not inform anyone about the incident. As
she was injured, her father admitted her in Patidar Hospital for
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.11739/2021
(Anil S/o Rajulal Nayak Vs. State of M.P.)
treatment and on the next day, prosecutrix narrated the incidence to
Rekhabai and her father- Omprakash Joshi; Bade Papa- Nanalal
Joshi and cousins - Heeralal Joshi & Dharmendra Joshi and
thereafter, she lodged F.I.R. at police station - Piplia Mandi and
accordingly, offence was registered against the accused persons.
03. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant
is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this
case. He has no nexus with the aforesaid offence. His earlier 4 th bail
application was dismissed as withdrawn. The applicant is in
custody since 27.04.2019 and prosecutrix has been examined
before the trial court. The applicant is young person of 20 years of
age. There is no possibility of his absconsion and tempering with
the evidence. He is permanent resident of distt.-Mandsaur. Charge-
sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take sufficient long
time, under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may
be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit
and proper.
04. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the prayer
for grant of bail and prays for its rejection.
05. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the prosecutrix
submits that prosecutrix has no objection, if the present applicant-
Anil Nayak is released on bail by this Court. The prosecutrix has
also filed an affidavit in support of her contention.
06. Perused the case-diary as well as the impugned order of the
trial court and other relevant documents filed by the parties.
07. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.11739/2021
(Anil S/o Rajulal Nayak Vs. State of M.P.)
the judgment passed by the Gujrat High Court in case of Imran
Shamsher Chouhan Vs. State of Gujrat (R/CR.MA/286/2018)
decided on 01.02.2018. His contention is that on the basis of 'no
objection' along with affidavit filed by the victim, the accused
person deserves to be enlarged on bail.
08. In the present case, statement of the prosecutrix has been
recorded by the trial court, therefore, this stand is not applicable in
the present case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satish
Jaggi Vs. State of Chattisgarh & Ors. (Cr.A. No.651/2007)
decided on 30.07.2007 has held as under:-
"At the state of granting of bail, the Court can only go
into the question of prima facie case established for
granting bail. It cannot go into the question of
credibility and reliability of the witnesses put up by the
prosecution. The question of credibility and reliability
of prosecution witnesses can only be tested during the
trial."
09. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Satish Jaggi (supra), this Court can only go into the question of the
prima facie case established for granting bail. At the stage of
consideration of bail, this Court cannot go into the question of
credibility and reliability of the witnesses put up by the
prosecution, therefore, at this stage marshalling of evidence of
statements of prosecutrix and her affdavit before this Court cannot
be done. It is a case of gang rape with minor girl.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C. No.11739/2021
(Anil S/o Rajulal Nayak Vs. State of M.P.)
nature and gravity of the allegation and also taking note of the fact
that prosecutrix has been examined before the trial court and in her
statement, she has categorically stated that along with the present
applicant-Anil Nayak, other three accused persons committed gang
rape upon her and caused so many injuries on her, hence, this Court
is of the considered opinion that in view of the evidence available
on record without commenting upon the merits of the case, this
Court is not inclined to allow the application. The present applicant
is not entitled for grant of bail. Accordingly, the present bail
application is dismissed.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Anil Verma)
Judge
N.R.
Digitally signed by NARENDRA
KUMAR RAIPURIA
Date: 2021.10.30 14:42:55
+05'30'
