Suryakant Bhargawa vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7258 MP

                                           1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                                      BEFORE
     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                          ON THE 13th OF MAY, 2022

      MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CASE NO.19015 OF 2022

       Between:-

       SURYAKANT    BHARGAWA,   S/O
       LATE SHRI SITARAM BHARGAWA,
       AGE     ABOUT    38  YEARS,
       OCCUPATION HOUSEWIFE, R/O A-
       17101, SUNWAY MEGA POLISH
       HIJWANI PHASE-3 BEHIND TCS
       HIJWANI PUNE (MAHARASHTRA)
                                                                ........APPLICANT
       (BY SHRI H.K. SHUKLA- ADVOCATE)

       AND

       STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
       THROUGH POLICE STATION CITY
       KOTWALI SHIVPURI, DISTRICT
       SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH).
                                                             ........RESPONDENT

        (SMT. ANJALI GYANANI - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR
        RESPONDENT/STATE AND SHRI ANIL MISHRA WITH
        SHRI SUSHIL GOSWAMI - ADVOCATES FOR
        COMPLAINANT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       This application coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed
the following:
                                       ORDER

Case diary is available.

2. This second application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail. First application was dismissed by order dated 21/3/2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No.10610/2022.

3. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.741/2021 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Shivpuri for offence under Sections 377, 498(A), 506, 34 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. This repeat application has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the complainant had filed a forged document in the nature of complaint dated 29/7/2020 made to Police Station Mahila Thana, District Shivpuri to project that on earlier occasion also she had made allegations of unnatural sex.

5. The complainant has lodged an FIR alleging that she got married to the applicant on 13/07/2013 and her father had given sufficient dowry as per his financial capability. After one year of her marriage, she gave birth to a child, who is mentally retarded and his treatment is going on. After the birth of his child, the applicant and her mother-in-law started passing taunts with regard to the disease of her son and they used to pass taunts that not only her father has not give anything to them but also the complainant has given birth to such a boy, for whose treatment they are required to spend money and accordingly, they started insisting that the complainant must bring Rs.10,00,000/- from her father. When she was refused to bring money, then she was assaulted by the applicant. When she informed her parents about the demand made by her in-laws, then her mother-in- law, Jeth Krishna Lal Bhargava, Alok Bhargava, sister-in-law

Rekha Sharma and her husband Ashok Sharma started harassing her physically and mentally and they were continuously demanding dowry.

6. During her stay with the applicant, he had committed unnatural sex on various occasions and whenever she objected, then she was beaten by the applicant. The applicant used to threaten that in case if she narrates anything to her family members, then she would be killed and as she was afraid, therefore, she did not disclose anything to anybody. In the month of July, 2020 her husband left her in her parental home alongwith her son. When the complainant insisted that she would reside with her husband, then she was beaten and threatened that unless and until she brings money, she should not come.

7. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the complainant had made various complaints against the applicant, in which she had not alleged anything about the unnatural sex.

8. When the aforesaid submissions were raised by the counsel for the applicant while arguing the first bail application, then it was projected by the counsel for the complainant that it is incorrect to say that the complainant had never made any complaint with regard to unnatural sex. In fact on 29/7/2020 the complainant had made a complaint to the Police Station Mahila Thana, District Shivpuri, in which it was specifically mentioned that she was subjected to unnatural sex. Accordingly, this Court by order dated 21/3/2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No.10610/2022 rejected the bail application of the applicant. Thereafter, second application has been filed alongwith the documents which were obtained by the applicant under Right to Information Act to show that no complaint was ever made by the complainant on 29/7/2020 and the copy

of the complaint which was filed by the complainant in the first bail application was a forged document. Accordingly, on 26/4/2022 the counsel for the complainant had sought time to file reply to the bail application. Thereafter, on 5/5/2022 the complainant filed a copy of the complaint dated 29/7/2020 made to Police Station Mahila Thana, District Shivpuri which was obtained under Right to Information Act.

9. Since two documents provided by the District Police Shivpuri were on record which were self-contradictory to each other, therefore, this Court by order dated 5/5/2022 directed the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri to conduct an enquiry into the matter and give a specific finding that whether the complainant had given any complaint to the Police Station Mahila Thana, Shivpuri on 29/7/2020 or not and accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri has filed his detailed report dated 9/5/2022, in which he has specifically stated that the Mahila Thana in Shivpuri came into existence w.e.f.1/7/2021. Acknowledgment receipt of complaint was given by Head Constable Shivkumar Shrivastava and on 29/7/2020 he was not posted in Women Cell, Shivpuri, but he was posted in Police Line, Shivpuri and was shifted to Women Cell, District Shivpuri on 24/3/2021 and the Women Cell was converted into Mahila Police Station on 1/7/2021. It is also mentioned that there is no reference of the complaint dated 29/7/2020 in the Inward and Outward register of Women Cell, District Shivpuri. It is further mentioned that the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava has admitted in his statement that he had received the copy of the complaint sometimes in the year 2022 and Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava without there being any order by the SHO, submitted his report on 9/2/2022. The said enquiry report does

not contain any mark by the SHO.

10. Thus, in short, it is mentioned that on 29/7/2020 the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava was not posted in Women Cell, District Shivpuri and, therefore, there is no question of receipt of complaint on the said date by Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava. Further, the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava has done everything without bringing the same to the notice of the SHO, Mahila Thana, Shivpuri. Accordingly, it has been held that the complaint dated 29/7/2020 was never made on 29/7/2020 and is a forged document. As a consequence thereof, Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava has been line-attached and departmental enquiry has been initiated against him. Further, disciplinary action would be taken against him on the basis of enquiry report.

11. Thus, it is clear that the the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri has given a specific finding that the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava had created a forged, false and manipulated document in the shape of complaint dated 29/7/2020, whereas the said complaint was never made on the said date.

12. In view of the report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri, it is clear that the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava has prima facie committed offence under Sections 466, 467, 468, 469 and 471 of IPC. Under these circumstances, the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri is directed to immediately register an FIR against the Head Constable 832, Shivkumar Shrivastava for the aforementioned offences. The Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri shall also be free to implicate any other person, who might have been involved in commission of this

offence.

13. So far as the merits of the case are concerned, according to the prosecution case, not only the applicant was being harassed for demand of dowry, but she was also subjected to unnatural sexual assault. It is clear that so far as the question of unnatural sexual assault is concerned, no complaint was ever made by the complainant on earlier occasion as well as she had relied upon a forged document to project that she had made a complaint to the police authorities with regard to the sexual assault on 29/7/2020. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

14. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed subject to condition that if the applicant appears before the Investigating Officer (Arresting Officer) on or before 20/5/2022, he shall be released on bail on his 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 Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer).

15. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr. P. C.

16. It is made clear that in case if the applicant fails to appear before the Investigating Officer (Arresting Authority) on or before 20/5/2022, then this order shall lose its effect and the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to take him in custody.

17. The application is allowed with cost of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand Only) to be deposited by the complainant within a period

of seven days from today in the Registry of this Court. In case if the cost is not deposited, then the Principal Registrar of this Court shall be free to proceed further in accordance with law.

18. The Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri is directed to submit the compliance report to the Principal Registrar of this Court within a period of fifteen days from today.

19. In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18/3/2021 in Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant.

20. CC as per rules.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2022.05.14 14:25:48 +05'30'