Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4267 MP
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 17 th OF MARCH, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11088 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
PRADEEP KUMAR PATEL S/O SHRI PRAKASH CHANDRA
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST CASTE LOHAR GRAM AMHORI
SHEETAL P.S. TEHARKA DISTRICT NIWARI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI A.K. KURMI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
MAHILA THANA NIWARI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI AMIT BHURRAK - PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the fifth bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of bail. His earlier bail applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 17.05.2022, 09.09.2022, 18.10.2022 & 13.01.2023 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.23918 of 2022, 28149 of 2022, 47434 of 2022 and 61204 respectively.
The applicant has been arrested on 09.04.2022 by Police Station Mahila Thana, District Niwari (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.16 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 456 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 3/20/2023 6:14:06 PM
This repeat application has been filed on the ground that the statements of the witnesses have been recorded before the trial court and to certain extent they have not supported the prosecution story. From the entire prosecution story, it is clear that it is a case of consent. The prosecutrix is a married lady and she has levied allegation of rape against the present applicant. The FIR is delayed by two days and the same is not explained by the prosecution. The applicant is in custody since 09.04.2022 and is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for grant of bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the
contention stating therein that there is specific allegation of committing rape against the present applicant. The prosecutrix has categorically supported the prosecution story in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and during court proceedings, which could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the applicant. The material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the witnesses cannot be considered at the bail stage in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others reported in 2007 Vol 11 SCC 195 . He has prayed for rejection of the application.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the prosecutrix has categorically supported the prosecution case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
(VISHAL MISHRA) Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 3/20/2023 6:14:06 PM
JUDGE sj
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 3/20/2023 6:14:06 PM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!