Shyam Lal Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13851 MP

                                     1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT JABALPUR
                                BEFORE
              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
                          ON THE 27th OF OCTOBER, 2022

                MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 46799 of 2022

         BETWEEN:-
         SHYAM LAL RAWAT S/O LATE SHRI DADDA
         RAWAT, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
         HARSED    POLICE  STATION   DHARKUNDI
         DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                  .....APPLICANT
         (BY SHRI M.P. RAJAK, ADVOCATE )

         AND
1.       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
         POLICE STATION DHARKUNDI DISTRICT
         SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.       VICTIM S/O NOT MENTION THROUGH R/O
         VILLAGE JHAKAURA, P.S. DHARKUNDI DISTT.
         SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
         (BY SHRI RAVINDRA SHUKLA, PANEL LAWYER)

       This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                      ORDER

This is first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant or grant of bail, pending trial.

The applicant is in custody since 15.02.2022 in connection with Crime No.24/2022 registered at P.S.-Dharkundi, District-Satna (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 376, 376-D, 342 and 506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act).

As per the prosecution case, on 14.02.2022, prosecutrix aged about 22

years filed an application in writing alleging therein that on 11.02.2022 at around 6:00 pm, she along with her younger sister was going towards the field to give meal to her mother. When she reached near Harsed turn, Ravendra Kol along with his friend met her and told her to leave the bicycle and to go along with them but she refused to go with them, at this Ravendra Kol and his friend caught hold her and started to abuse. Thereafter, they both forcibly took her in the pigeon pea field and laid her on the earth. Ravendra Kol took off her cloths, caught hold her hand. When Ravendra's friend was trying to commit rape with her. Ravendra Kol was touching her breast and waist. When she attempted to raise noise, Ravendra Kol gagged her mouth. Ravendra Kol committed rape

upon her and thereafter they both threatened her that if she narrated the incident to anyone, they will eliminate her. FIR was lodged. Sample of prosecutrix's vaginal swab sent for chemical examination and FSL report, it has been found positive. In her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. prosecutrix has made allegations of her gang rape by Ravendra Kol, one boy of her village and one other persons. In identification panchnama, prosecutrix has duly identified all the three persons as author of crime. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is innocent. He has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated. There is no specific evidence against the present applicant Shyam Lal Rawat. It is further submitted that the entire case of prosecution is doubtful as earlier allegations were made against two person only but later story was improved and allegations were made against the three persons. There is no material on record to show as to how the name of applicant Shyam Lal Rawat has surfaced in the prosecution story. It is further submitted that prosecutrix has been examined

before the trial Court and in her evidence she has made contradictory statement. Therefore, it has been prayed that applicant/accused be released on bail.

O n the other hand, learned P.L. has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant and has stated that prosecutrix has duly identified the present applicant. In her testimony before the trial Court she has specifically stated about the role played in her gang rape by the present applicant Shyam Lal Rawat. Therefore, it has been prayed that applicant/accused be not released on bail.

I have gone through the case diary and other material. Prosecutrix has been examined before the trial Court and in her evidence tendered before the trial Court she has made specific statement against the present applicant and other co-accused person. The truthfulness and reliability of the prosecutrix evidence is not required to be adjudged by this Court at this stage as it is for the trial Court to appreciat the veracity of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses at the time of delivery of the judgment.

But having taken into consideration all the allegations made against the present applicant and co-accused by the prosecutrix and the fact that it is a case of gang rape. I am of the view that it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant when trial of the case is already underway.

Therefore, this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant - Shyam Lal Rawat stands dismissed.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE L.R.

Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2022.10.28 12:59:15 +05'30'