Mausam Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1386 MP

                                                     1
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                           ON THE 31st OF JANUARY, 2022

                                      CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 728 of 2022

                             Between:-
                             MAUSAM SAHU S/O RATILAL SAHU , AGED
                             ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE
                             JOB WARD NO.16 SHRAMIK NAGAR KOTMA
                             POLICE   STATION   KOTMA   DISTRICT
                             ANUPPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                .....APPELLANT
                             (BY SHRI MADAN SINGH, ADVOCATE )

                             AND

                             THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                             POLICE    STATION  KOTMA     ANUPPUR
                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
                             (BY SHRI JITENDRA SHRIVASTAVA, PANEL LAWYER )

                              (BY Ms. SANDHYA DEVI RAJAK, OBJECTOR


                                         (Heard through Video Conferencing)
                            This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
                      Vivek Agarwal passed the following:
                                                      ORDER

This is first appeal under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 on behalf of the appellant- Mausam Sahu.

Case Crime No. 576/2021 is registered at Police Station Kotma, District Anuppur for offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 506 of I.P.C., 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(V-a) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. The appellant is in custody since 26.12.2021.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that allegations on the appellant are that for last 6 years he was having relationship with the complainant and in the name of marriage physically exploited her on

Signature SAN Not several occasions starting from 2017. It is submitted that instead of Verified

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN Date: 2022.02.01 19:23:27 IST

fulfilling promise of marriage, appellant married somebody else at the instance of her family members on 12.06.2021. Thereafter complainant had stopped talking to the appellant and thereafter appellant had assured her that she has entered into a wedlock under the pressure of her parents and he will divorce his wife and marry with the complainant.

It is submitted that FIR has been lodged on 12.12.2021 and appellant is in custody since 26.12.2021. Investigation is complete, charge-sheet has been filed and no more custodial interrogation is required. Examination of the prosecutrix has also already taken place and her statements have been recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C..

Shri Madan Singh places reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Vs. State of Maharastra and others, AIR 2009 SC, 327 and submits that in such cases where the consent was neither misguided nor coercive Court should have a lenient view.

Learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application and submits that in 164 statements given by the prosecutrix, she has supported the case of the prosecution. If appellant enlarge on bail, he may try to influence the witnesses and, therefore, he may not be given benefit of bail.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the record, it is evident that since investigation is complete, charge-sheet is already filed, no more custodial interrogation is required, without commenting o n the merits of the case, this appeal is allowed and impugned order passed by the Special Court is hereby set aside.

It is directed that appellant- Mausam Sahu be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court to appear before the Court on the dates

given by the concerned Court. It is further directed that appellant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.

I n view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-

19)'/Omicron virus, the concerned Jail Authority is directed to follow the directions/guidelines issued by the Government with regard to COVID- 19 before releasing the appellant.

Accordingly, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Tabish