Rakesh Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1431 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.63752/2021 (RAKESH JATAV VS. STATE OF M.P. & ANR.)

Through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 01/02/2022

Shri Rishikesh Bohare, learned counsel for the applicant.

Ms. Kalpana Parmar, learned counsel for the State.

Case diary is available.

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

filed for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 03/12/2020 in connection

with Crime No.24/2019 registered at Police Station Sirsi, District

Guna for offence under Sections 363, 344, 376(2)(n), 506, 34, 120-B

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

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that according

to the prosecution case, the prosecutrix had eloped with the applicant

and had physical relationship with him. However, her evidence has

been recorded and she has turned hostile on the question of physical

relationship.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that

in her cross-examination, the prosecutrix has specifically admitted

that she had stayed at Karahal as husband and wife. It is further

submitted that in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme

Court in the case of Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi vs. State of

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.63752/2021 (RAKESH JATAV VS. STATE OF M.P. & ANR.)

Gujarat, passed on 28.09.2018 in Criminal Appeal No.913/2016

even if the prosecutrix has turned hostile, still the accused can be

convicted with the help of scientific evidence.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

As per the prosecution case, the date of birth of the prosecutrix

is 10/11/2003 and she eloped with the applicant on 09/04/2019. Thus,

it is clear that she was minor on the day when she left her house.

The Supreme Court in the case of Anversinh @ Kiransinh

Fatesinh Zala Vs. State of Gujarat by judgment dated 12/01/2021

passed in CRA No.1919/2010 has held that if a minor girl is enticed

by the accused, then merely because she went on her own cannot be a

good ground to acquit the accused.

Furthermore, in the cross-examination, the prosecutrix has

admitted that she had disclosed to the police that she had stayed with

the applicant as a husband and wife. The DNA test report has also not

been received. Accordingly, no case is made out for grant of bail.

The application fails and is hereby dismissed.

                                                                      (G.S. Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                                      Judge
         Digitally signed by
         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         Date: 2022.02.01
         16:48:10 -08'00'