Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kiledar Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 March, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.10081/2022
(KILEDAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated : 02/03/2022
Shri S.P.Singh Gurjar, learned counsel for the applicant.
Smt. Anjali Gyanani, learned counsel for the State.
Shri Ankur Maheshwari, learned counsel for the complainant.
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 09/02/2022 in connection
with Crime No.501/2021 registered at Police Station Bamore, District
Morena for offence under Sections 366, 376(d), 376(2)(h), 323 and
506 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that this Court
by a detailed order dated 24/01/2022 passed in MCRC No.3781/2022
has granted bail to co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar and the case of the
applicant is identical to that of co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the
Counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant. It is
submitted that the reasons assigned by this Court for granting bail to
co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar would also apply to the present
applicant.
Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the
parties.
2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.10081/2022
(KILEDAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)
This Court by order dated 24/01/2022 passed in MCRC
No.3781/2022 has granted bail to co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar by
observing as under:-
"It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant
that according to the prosecution case, the prosecutrix
who is aged about 20 years lodged a FIR that she was
residing in her parental home along with her mother
and is carrying a pregnancy of eight months. About
three months back, at about 7 to 8 pm she was sitting
in her rented room, and her mother was preparing
food. At that time 14 to 15 persons came there
including the applicant, her husband Ajay Gurjar and
father- in- law Sultan Gurjar and tried to drag her.
When her mother and other persons intervened in the
matter then they were assaulted and attempt was
made to forcefully abduct her by putting her in the
vehicle. When she was continuously resisting, then
one person gave lathi blow on her head and thereafter
she lost her consciousness and when she regained her
consciousness, she found that she was completely
without clothes and was lying on the floor of the car.
The husband was sitting on the front seat of the car
and the car was parked by the side of a canal.
Thereafter, they took her to the house of one Sabha
Ram Gurjar. She was kept in a forest area for 7 to 8
days and she was being guarded by various persons,
including her husband Ajay Gurjar and father in law
Sultan Gurjar. It is alleged that applicant and other
accused persons committed rape on her. Thereafter
she was brought back to the house of Sabha Ram
Gurjar from where they shifted her to the house of
Ramlakhan. Thereafter she was taken to the house of
Suresh and Bhabuti. Again She was shifted to the
house of Sabha Ram Gurjar. Whenever the police
came in search of her, they used to remove her from
the house. When her mother filed writ of habeaus
corpus before the High Court, then she was produced
by the police before the High Court and as she was
under threat therefore, she did not disclose anything
in the Court. It is submitted that infact the prosecutrix
3
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.10081/2022
(KILEDAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)
has lodged a false report. There appears to be some
dispute between her and her husband and father- in-
law which has been given colour of gang rape. When
the prosecutrix was produced before the High Court,
then not only she was in police protection but she was
in the protection of the High Court and it is incorrect
to say that she could not collect her courage to depose
the above mentioned allegations. The applicant is in
jail from 12.11.2021. Furthermore, prosecutrix was
allegedly abducted 25.08.2021 whereas the FIR was
lodged on 11.11.2021. Furthermore, the prosecutrix
was handed-over to the custody of her mother on
22.10.2021
, but again the prosecutrix took 20 days to
lodge the report. 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 application is opposed by the
Counsel for the State. It is submitted by Shri Singh
that since the prosecutrix was afraid of threatening
extended by the accused persons, therefore, she could
not disclose the allegations before the High Court.
However, the allegations are that she was gang raped.
The Counsel for the complainant has also supported
the prosecution case and opposed the bail application.
In view of the FIR lodged by the prosecutrix,
this Court called the file of W.P. No. 21901/2021
which was filed by her mother under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India in the nature of habeaus
corpus. In the said writ petition, it was specifically
mentioned by the mother of the prosecutrix that the
prosecutrix is the legally wedded wife of Ajay Gurjar
and Sultan Singh, her father-in-law. In the writ
petition FIR in Crime No. 358/2021 registered at
Police Station Banmore, Distt. Morena is also
annexed, in which it is alleged that on 30.08.2021 at
about 7 pm, the mother of the prosecutrix was sitting
outside door of her house. At that time her son-in-law
Ajay Gurjar, Kiledar and Indel Gurjar started abusing
her filthily and scolded as to why she does not send
her daughter with him. When the mother of the
prosecutrix objected as to why they are abusing her,
then it was alleged that Ajay, husband of the
prosecutrix assaulted on the thigh of her right leg by a
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.10081/2022
(KILEDAR SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)
danda, Bharat assaulted on her shoulder by a danda
and Indel assaulted by danda on her right waist. After
hearing her cries Ramdeen Gurjar and Ramanuj Gurjar
came there and saved her and they were also
challenging that she would be killed in future. Thus,
it is clear that if the prosecutrix was already abducted
on 25.08.2021, then why was the need of the husband
of the prosecutrix to come back to the house of the
prosecutrix and to scold her mother. Furthermore, if
the prosecutrix was already abducted on 25.08.2021,
then why this fact was not mentioned in the FIR."
Since, no distinguishable feature could be pointed out by the
counsel for the parties and 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 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)
Pj'S/- Judge
Digitally signed by
PRINCEE BARAIYA
Date: 2022.03.02
14:53:10 -08'00'
