Madhya Pradesh High Court
Richpal Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 November, 2022
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 11th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9853 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. RICHPAL SINGH S/O SHRI MOOL SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS
LADSAR POLICE STATION RATANGANJ
DISTRICT CHURU RAJASTHAN (RAJASTHAN)
2. BAJRANG SINGH S/O MOOL SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DRIVER R/O
KHIROD, P.S. NAWALGANJ, DISRICT
JUNJUNU(RAJASTHAN) (RAJASTHAN)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI DHIRESH SINGH DUBEY, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION HANUMANA DISTRICT REWA
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM A S/O NOT MENTION THROUGH
POLICE STATION HANUMANA, DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SATPAL CHADHAR, LEARNED GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9596 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
RAMBAHORE VISHWAKARMA S/O SHRI
BUDDHSEN VISHAKARMA, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O VILLAGE
BHUARI, P.S. AND TAHSIL HANUMANA,
DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI RAKESH DWIVEDI, ADVOCATE)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
12:08:09 PM
2
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
STATION HOUSE OFFICER P.S. HANUMANA
DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM A D/O NOT MENTION THROUGH P.S.
HANUMANA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SATPAL CHADHAR, LEARNED GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE )
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
JUDGMENT
These criminal appeals have been filed under Section 14-A(1) of the
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the orders dated 20.10.2022
and 27.05.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
District Rewa (M.P.) whereby bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
preferred by appellants/accused for grant of bail have been dismissed.
Appellants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.96/2022
registered at Police Station Hanumana, District Rewa (M.P.) for the offences
punishable under Sections 366, 370, 376, 376(2)(n), 368 of IPC and Section
3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Appellant
Richpal Singh and Bajrang Singh are in jail since 24.03.2022 whereas appellant
Rambahore Vishwakarma is in jail since 29.03.2022.
As per the prosecution case, on 17.03.2022, complainant/ father of the
prosecutrix moved an application in writing before police stating therein that in
the month of December, 2021, his 22 years old daughter got missing all of a
sudden. After three days his daughter made a call informing him that she has
been sold in a village known as Ladasar, under Police Station Ratangarh,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
12:08:09 PM
District Churu, Rajasthan by Rambahore Vishwakarma of his village. An FIR
was registered for commission of offence under Section 366, 370 of IPC and
Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ ST Act vide FIR No.96/2022 of P.S. Hanumana District
Rewa. On 24.3.2022, 23 years old daughter of the complainant was produced
in Police Station Hanumana by Richpal Singh. She was handed over to the
custody of her father. Prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
before Magistrate has stated that three years ago she alongwith Rambahore
Vishwakarma of her village had left. She was taken to village Tikariya at the
house of Savai there Lakhan also came. Thereafter, all three took her to village
Ladasar, Rajasthan and got her married to Richpal Singh. She was living with
Richpal Singh for last three years. She had made a call to her friend and had
requested her to get her talked with her family members. Thereafter, she was
continuously speaking to her parents and was in their contact. After one year
when her husband's brother-in-law came to see her mother-in-law, she had
asked him that she wanted to go to meet her parents. She had made similar
request to her sister-in-law but they all refused to take her to her parental house
and over this issue she had some heated arguments with her in-laws. At this her
sister-in-law's son told her that she had been sold to them by her father.
Thereafter, she made call to her father and informed him that she is in village
Ladasar, District Churu, Rajasthan. She had also made a call to Rambahore
Vishwakarma telling that she wanted to meet her parents but after her call,
Rambahor Vishwakarma switched off his phone. After investigation charge
sheet has been filed.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellants have not
committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated. They are innocent.
Prosecutrix father himself got the prosecutrix married with Rachhpal Singh. As
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
12:08:09 PM
far as present appellants are concerned, there are no specific allegations against
them that they facilitated the sale of prosecutrix or did anything in furtherance of
the common intention. Trial of the case will take considerable time. Therefore,
it has been prayed that appellants-accused be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant of
bail to the appellants.
I have gone through the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section
164 Cr.P.C. and other material on record. Admittedly prosecutrix was got
married with Richpal Singh three years ago, whereas, FIR has been lodged in
the month of March, 2022. Therefore, having taken into consideration the
totality of the facts and circumstances and the material available against the
appellants, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the
view that it is a case in which further pre-trial detention of the
appellants/accused is not warranted.
Therefore, both the appeals are allowed. It is directed that the appellants -
Richpal Singh, Bajrang Singh and Rambahore Vishwakarma be released
on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand Only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the
concerned Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial
Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following
conditions by the appellants :-
1. The appellants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the
bond executed by them;
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
12:08:09 PM
2. The appellants will cooperate in the trial;
3. The appellants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer,
as the case may be;
4. The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which they are accused;
5. The appellants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
and
6. The appellants will not leave India without prior permission of the trial
Court.
7. In case of bail jump and violation of conditions of bail, this order shall
become ineffective.
Accordingly, appeal is disposed off.
C.C. as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
kundan
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
12:08:09 PM
