The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Omprakash Jaiswar
2022 Latest Caselaw 1825 MP

                                   1
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                BEFORE
                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                   &
               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR SHARMA
                       ON THE 9th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

               MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 42802 of 2020

        Between:-
        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S.
        PIPLANI BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                 .....PETITIONER
        (By Shri Akshay Pawar, Panel Lawyer for the petitioner State)

        AND

        OMPRAKASH     JAISWAR    S/O   LATE LAL
        BAHADUR , AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, VILLAGE
        AND POST ARAIYA P.S. JEEYANPUR TEHSIL
        SAGDI DISTT. AZAMGARH U.P. AT PRESENT
        RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. D-2/241 D SECTOR
        BHAIL PIPLANI DISTT. BHOPAL (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

                                                              .....RESPONDENTS


                     (Heard through Video Conferencing)
      This MCRC is coming on for admission on 9th Day of February,

JUSTICE Arun Kumar Sharma passed the following:
                                    ORDER

Heard.

This MCRC has been instituted on an application under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of the respondent from the offences under Sections 376(2) of the IPC registered by PS-Mahila Thana, Bhopal MP.

The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on 7.2.2019, a report was lodged by the prosecutrix in the said police station. The respondent and the prosecutrix know each other since 6 years. The respondent also asked the prosecutrix to marry her and on the said false pretext, the respondent committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.

Learned PL for the applicant State submits that the learned trial Court

has erred in acquitting the respondent of the aforesaid offence. The trial Court has not believe the statement of the prosecution witnesses. The trial Court on the basis of conjectures and surmises has acquitted the respondent accused from the said offence. The prosecution case was also not believed and was totally rejected on the flimsy grounds. The statements of the prosecutrix was also not properly given advantage by the learned Trial Court, therefore, it has

been prayed that the leave to appeal be granted in the case and the case be allowed.

The Court below disbelieved the case of prosecution because FIR was lodged after unexplained delay of about ten months. The court below further opined that there exits no element of promise of marriage by the respondent with the prosecutrix and hence, necessary ingredients for invoking Section 375 of IPC are absent.

In our opinion, the Court below has rightly analyzed the factual backdrop of the matter in the teeth of Section 375 of IPC. By placing reliance on various judgments of Supreme Court, the Court below has rightly opined that every consent of prosecutrix or a misconception of facts because of which consent of physical relations is given by her will not attract Section 375 of IPC. The Court below, in our opinion has taken a plausible view, which does not warrant interference by this Court.

In this view of the matter, no case is made out for grant of leave. Accordingly the M.Cr.C. for grant of leave to appeal is rejected.

                                             (SUJOY PAUL)                                 (ARUN KUMAR SHARMA)
                                                JUDGE                                             JUDGE
                                        sh




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by S HUSHMAT HUSSAIN
Date: 2022.02.10 11:18:05 IST