Rahul Kumhar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 7210 MP

                                                            1
                          IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                   BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
                                                 ON THE 3 rd OF MAY, 2023
                                        MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 13120 of 2023

                         BETWEEN:-
                         RAHUL KUMHAR S/O SHRI MUNNALAL KUMHAR,
                         AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O
                         VILLAGE RADHAL DEHAT NARMDAPURAM DISTRICT
                         NARMDAPURAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....APPLICANT
                         (BY SHRI S. S. RAJPUT - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                               POLICE   STATION  HARDOOD    DISTRICT
                               KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    VICTIM A THROUGH POLICE STATION HARSOOD
                               DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI VINAY SHARMA - PANEL LAWYER)

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

                         following:
                                                             ORDER

The present applicant has filed this first bail application under section 439 o f the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, who is in judicial custody since 23.01.2023 in connection with Crime No.191/2022 registered at Police Station Harsood, district Khandwa, fo r the offences punishable under sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) and 368 of IPC and sections 5L/6 and 5/(i)(ii)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and section 3(2)(va) of the

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 5/4/2023 2:58:55 PM

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

According to the prosecution case, on 3.5.2022 around 8:00 p.m. the complainant and his wife had gone to village Bhavarli to attend a wedding. When they reached home next morning, they were informed by their children that their daughter, the victim, had left home at 4:00 a.m. without informing them. They searched for the victim but she was not traceable pursuant to which they lodged report at Police Station Harsud. It is alleged that the applicant took the prosecutrix to another place and committed sexual intercourse with her.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim herself wanted

to leave her parental home. She also insisted for co-habitation and physical relation with applicant. Learned counsel has invited the attention of this court to the statement of victim recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C. wherein she has specifically stated that she went along with the applicant on her own volition and she also asked the applicant to have physical relations with her, whereas the applicant told her that she should go back to her home. She threatened the applicant with dire consequences if she was asked by him to go back. Learned counsel has referred the judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of Ranjit Rajbanshi v. State of Bengal & ors 2021 SCC Online Cal.2470 which relates to participatory physical relationship between a minor girl and the accused.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant resides at village Radhal Dehat, district Narmadapuram, with his family. There is no likelihoold of his absconding leaving behind his family to suffer. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed. No criminal antecedents have been reported against the applicant. Trial will take time for its conclusion. Hence, Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 5/4/2023 2:58:55 PM

prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the bail application and prayed for its dismissal.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary.

Considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, but without commenting anything on the merits, this court is inclined to grant bail to applicant Rahul Kumhar in relation to Crime No.191/2022 registered at Police Station Harsood, district Khandwa, for the offences punishable under sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) and 368 of IPC and sections 5L/6 and 5/(i)(ii)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 and section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and it is hereby directed that the applicant b e released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court on the dates given by the concerned Court during pendency of trial. Further, the applicant shall comply with the conditions enumerated in section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of breach of any of the pre-conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective

without any reference to this court.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE ps Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 5/4/2023 2:58:55 PM