Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jitendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 January, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 19 th OF JANUARY, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1175 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
JITENDRA S/O SHRI BRAJ MOHAN SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER RESIDENT
OF VILLAGE BHAISARWAS PS DEHAT DISTRICT ASHOK
NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI PRABAL PRATAP SINGH SOLANKI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
APPELLANT)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
DEHAT, DISTRICT ASHOK NAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. PROSECUTRICS S/O N/A THROUGH PS DEHAT
CRIME NO. 588/2021 DISTRICT ASHOKNAGR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( SHRI NIRMAL SHARMA, LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE
RESPONDENT NO.1- STATE AND NONE FOR THE COMPLAINANT EVEN
THOUGH NOTICE HAS BEEN SERVED IN COMPLIANCE OF PROVISIONS
OF SC & ST ACT)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The appellant has filed this third criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2)
of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
[ in short '' SC & ST Act''] against the order dated 06-01-2022 passed by
Special Judge (Atrocities) rejecting the bail application filed by appellant under
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 1/20/2023
11:21:59 AM
Section 439 of CrPC. First Criminal Appeal was dismissed on merits by
coordinate Bench of this Court (Hon'ble Shri Justice G.S.Ahluwalia) vide order
dated 09-02-2022 passed in CRA No. 898 of 2022 and second Criminal Appeal
was also dismissed in view of DNA test report and the judgment passed by
Supreme Court in the case of Hemudan Nanbha Gadhvi vs. State of
Gujarat reported in (2019) 17 SCC 523 vide order dated 23rd of July, 2022
passed by coordinate Bench of this Court (Hon'ble Shri Justice G.S. Ahluwalia)
in CRA No. 4290 of 2022.
Appellant has been arrested on 23-09-2021 by Police Station Dehat,
Ashok Nagar in connection with Crime No.588 of 2021 registered in relation to
offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 366, 323, 506 of IPC and under
Sections 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v) of SC and ST Act.
As per the prosecution story, on 16-09-2021 at 05:00 pm, complainant-
prosecutrix lodged a computerized complaint with PS Dehat, District Ashok
Nagar alleging against the present appellant that on the false pretext of marriage,
he has committed sexual intercourse with her. As per her allegation that she
knew the present appellant three-four years back and both of them started liking
to each other. On 15-11-2020 at about 10:00 in the night, on the false pretext of
marriage, the appellant took her to Jaipur where in a rented room he kept her as
his wife and committed sexual intercourse and thereafter, she along with
appellant went to Delhi where for about six months without getting her married,
also committed sexual intercourse in a rented room and committed marpeet with
her and thereafter, in a rented room at Guna he also committed sexual
intercourse and threatened her with dire consequences if she uses to tell about
the marriage. On the basis of which, Crime No.588 of 2021 has been registered
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 1/20/2023
11:21:59 AM
against the appellant for commission of aforesaid offences. After completion of
investigation and other formalities, charge sheet was filed.
It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the appellant
has been falsely implicated. The incident was happened on 15-11-2020 while
FIR was lodged by prosecutrix on 16-09-2021 after 11 months of the alleged
incident and there is dealy of 11 months in loding the report. After completion
of investigation, charge sheet has been filed. All the material witnesses including
prosecutrix have been examined before trial Court and they have turned hostile
as they did not support the prosecution version. Conclusion of trial will take
some time and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the
prosecution case. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal and prayed for its
rejection.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case
and also the fact that appellant is in custody since 23-09-2021 and author of
FIR, i.e. prosecutrix has been turned hostile by the prosecution and conclusion
of trial will take time, but without commenting on the merits of the case, this
Court is of the opinion that the appeal should be allowed and by allowing the
appeal, it is ordered that if appellant furnishes cash surety of Rs.15,000/-
along with bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only)
with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court,
he should be released on bail. He will present during trial before the trial Court
on each and every date. In case of any default, cash security of Rs.15,000/-
shall be forfeited without giving any notice.
Accordingly, appeal stands disposed of.
Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 1/20/2023
11:21:59 AM
Certified copy as per rules.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 1/20/2023
11:21:59 AM
