Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neeraj Kevat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 April, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.18838/2022
Neeraj Kevat vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Gwalior, Dated : 19/04/2022
Shri Sheeshu Yadav, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri C.P. Singh, Counsel for respondent/State.
Case diary is available.
This second application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been
filed for grant of bail. The first bail application was dismissed as
withdrawn by order dated 6.9.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.43933/2021.
The applicant has been arrested on 13.7.2021 in connection with
Crime No.63/2021 registered at Police Station Gauraghat, District
Datia for offence under Sections 376(D), 450, 506 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that according to
the prosecution case the applicant along with other co-accused persons
entered inside the house of the prosecutrix and the co-accused Amit
committed rape on her whereas the applicant and others disrobed her
and caught hold of her. It is submitted that the prosecutrix has turned
hostile in toto. Accordingly, by order dated 22.03.2022 in
M.Cr.C.No.14048/2022, the DNA test report was called.
It was submitted by Smt. Gyanani in M.Cr.C.No.14048/2022
that the DNA test report has been received and as per the same the
DNA profile of the co-accused Amit Sahu was not found in the
vaginal slides and other incriminating articles of the prosecutrix.
In view of the DNA test report, it is submitted that the entire
allegations alleged by the prosecutrix were false and she has turned
hostile, therefore, there is no substantial evidence against the
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.18838/2022
Neeraj Kevat vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
applicant. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is
no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution
case. This Court by order dated 11.4.2022 passed in
M.Cr.C.No.14048/2022 has granted bail to the co-accused Mukul.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the
counsel for the State. However, it is fairly conceded that the DNA test
report does not indicates the presence of DNA profile of Amit Sahu,
but it is submitted that it appears that either the witnesses had made a
false report or they have not narrated the true facts before the Court,
therefore, they are liable to be prosecuted.
Whether the prosecution of witnesses is desirable or not is left
to the discretion of the Trial Court. Therefore, it is directed that the
Trial Court while deciding the trial shall address on this issue also and
shall pass a specific order as to whether the prosecution of the
witnesses is warranted or not.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without
commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is
directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with one surety
in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal
Court to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned
Court.
This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in
case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.18838/2022
Neeraj Kevat vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the
case of Aparna Bhat and others Vs. State of M.P. Passed on
18.03.2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 329/2021, the intimation
regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant.
Certified copy as per rules.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Judge
(alok)
ALOK KUMAR
2022.04.19 18:07:44 +05'30'
