Chandan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1184 MP

                               1
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        Cr.A.751/2022
           Chandan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

                    Through video conferencing

Gwalior, Dated: 25.01.2022

      Shri Sunil Soni, Counsel for the appellant.

      Ms. Kalpana Parmar, Counsel for respondent/State.

None for the respondent No. 2/complainant.

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

has been informed about the pendency of this appeal as required

under Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short "Act").

Case diary is available.

This appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of the Act

against the order dated 12.01.2022 passed by Special Judge

(Atrocities) Gwalior, rejecting the bail application.

The appellant has been arrested on 09.01.2022 in connection

with Crime No.13/2022 registered by Police Station University Distt.

Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 376, 323, 326, 506 of

IPC and Sections 3 (2) (v), 3 (1) (w) (ii), SC/ST (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 2012.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that according

to the prosecution case, the prosecutrix was earlier residing as

tenant of the appellant and thereafter half portion of house was sold

to the the prosecutrix. It is alleged that on 26.10.2021 the appellant

committed rape on her. Thereafter on 09.01.2022, when the appellant

again tried to commit rape on her, then on her screaming Ratan Jain

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.751/2022 Chandan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

intervened in the matter. The appellant assaulted the prosecutrix as a

result her teeth were broken.

It is submitted that infact the appellant has been falsely

implicated. Ratan Jain is the resident of Purani Chawni whereas the

prosecutrix is the resident of Naka Chandrawani. There was no

reason for Ratan Jain to come to the house of prosecutrix. Infact, the

prosecutrix has suppressed the original incident. The appellant is in

jail from 09.01.2022. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time

and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the

prosecution case.

Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by the counsel

for the State. It is submitted that Ratan Jain has stated that he had

gone to the house of the prosecutrix in connection with some

electricity work. However, he fairly conceded that no such reason for

arrival of Ratan Jain has been mentioned by the prosecutrix except by

saying that three persons came to her house for doing some work.

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case,

this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for grant of

bail.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case,

the appeal is allowed. It is directed that the appellant 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

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.751/2022 Chandan Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.

This order shall remain effective till the end of trial but in case

of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

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 ar ABDUR RAHMAN 2022.01.25 16:46:22 +05'30'