Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ravi Jaat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 November, 2023

Author: Anil Verma

                                                        1
                            IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                            ON THE 3 rd OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                          CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12296 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    RAVI JAAT S/O OM PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 25
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O:
                                 VILLAGE PIPALANI, POLICE STATION KANNOD,
                                 DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    OM PRAKASH S/O TEJRAM, AGED ABOUT 40
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O:
                                 PIPALANI, P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    KAPIL S/O KAILASH, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: PIPALANI,
                                 P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    JAGDISH S/O GENDA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: PIPALANI,
                                 P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           5.    DEVILAL S/O OMKAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: PIPALANI,
                                 P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           6.    NAND KISHORE S/O JAGDISH, AGED ABOUT 35
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O:
                                 PIPALANI, P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           7.    PALAK RAM S/O PANNALAL, AGED ABOUT 42
                                 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O:
                                 PIPALANI, P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           8.    SURESH S/O KISAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: PIPALANI,
                                 P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           9.    SANTOSH S/O KISAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O: PIPALANI,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANUSHREE
PANDEY
Signing time: 04-11-2023
14:53:25
                                                          2
                                 P.S. KANNOD, DIST. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....APPELLANTS
                           (MS. SMITA VARMA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                 HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                 KANNOD, DISTRICT DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    VICTIM A NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
                           (MR. VIKAS YADAV - ADVOCATE FOR OBJECTOR AND
                           MR. AMIT RAWAL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the

                           following:
                                                               ORDER

Heard on I.A. No.15105 of 2023, which is an application for ignoring the defects.

2. Defects pointed out by the registry are formal in nature, therefore, I.A. No.15105 of 2023 is allowed and defects is pointed out by the Registry are hereby ignored.

3. Counsel for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw I.A. No.15194 of 2023, which is an application for ad interim protection against arrest to the appellants pending the present Criminal Appeal.

4. Prayer is allowed.

5. Accordingly, I.A. No.15194 of 2023 stands dismissed as withdrawn.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has informed this Court that notice has been duly served upon the prosecutrix.

7. Appellants have filed this first criminal appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 04-11-2023 14:53:25

read with Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail relating to Crime No.500/2023 registered at P.S. Kannod, District Dewas (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 343, 376, 376(2)(n), 376(D) and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1) (w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ ST Act.

8 . As per prosecution story, on 07.02.2023, about 08:00 AM, in the morning, the prosecutrix had gone for cutting the crops in the agriculture land of accused/ Ravi Jaat. On the same day, at about 06:00 PM, Ravi Jaat told her that there is some work regarding cleaning in his house and on his saying, she went to his house and did cleaning work and when she was returning to her house, at that time, Ravi Jaat told her that she will not go to her house and forcibly took her in the room and committed rape upon her. Then he locked her in his house for a period of three days and on 10.02.2023, at about 11-11:30 PM, accused Ravi and his maternal uncle Nand Ram Jaat took her on motor- cycle in the house of Devilal, then Ravi Jaat and Devilal committed gang rape upon her and other co-accused persons were also present outside the room. On the next date, when her husband reached there, he released her from the custody of accused persons, then she went in Nari Niketan, Ujjain and after about one month her sister-in-law/ Suman came in the Nari Niketan, then she went alongwith her at Village Khiroda, Satwas. After that, she lodged an FIR

against the accused persons. Accordingly, offence has been registered.

9. At the outset, counsel for the appellants prays for withdrawal of the criminal appeal on behalf of appellant No.8 Suresh.

10. Accordingly, the first criminal appeal preferred under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 04-11-2023 14:53:25

Procedure, 1973 to the extent appellant No.8 Suresh is concerned, stands dismissed as withdrawn.

11. In respect of all the appellants, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this offence. Appellant No.4 Jagdish is aged about 75 years. Appellant No.8 Suresh is a blind from birth. On 07.02.2023, prosecutrix left the house of her husband without telling anything to anybody in her house and went at Village Pipalkota and on the same day, at about 7:00 PM, she went to the house of Jagdish Jaat, at that time, her husband and brother-in-law and other relatives came there and committed marpeet, due to which she sustained injuries, then she lodged an FIR against her husband and other persons. Prosecutrix remained Nari Niketan for a period of one month and during this period police did not record her statement. There is inordinate delay of more than 5 months in lodging the FIR. On 10.02.2023, complainant party, who were 11 in number jointly and severally came in the house of appellant No.4 Jagdish and set fire after pouring the kerosene oil and they also burnt the records of the house, therefore, offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 436, 454 and 506 of IPC has been registered against them. The statement of the prosecutrix has not corroborated by the medical evidence. Appellants are agriculturalists. They are permanent resident of district Dewas and there is no apprehension of them fleeing away from the court of justice. Final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

12. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellants has

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 04-11-2023 14:53:25

p lac ed reliance upon the order dated 21.04.2003 passed in MCRC No.1600/2003 by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in the case of Somesh Das Vs. State of C.G., in the case of Mehandi Lal Yadav Vs. State of C.G . vide order dated 12.03.2003 passed in CRR No.111/2003 and Jeevan Bai Vs. State of M.P. vide order dated 13.10.2014 passed in MCRC No.13236/2014.

13. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the criminal appeal and prays for its rejection by submitting that Appellant No.1 Ravi and appellant No.5 Devilal have committed gang rape upon the prosecutrix. She was pregnant at the time of incident and other appellants helped them in committing offence. Prosecution story is corroborated with the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Hence, appellants are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

14. learned counsel for the objector also opposes the criminal appeal and prays for its rejection by submitting that as per provision of Section 19 of SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Section 438 of Cr.P.C. appellants are required for interrogation in the aforesaid offence, therefore, appellants do not deserve for anticipatory bail.

15. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court and the case diary.

16. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also taking note of the fact that all the accused persons are named in the FIR; prosecutrix corroborated the prosecution story in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.; prosecutrix is a member of tribal community and appellants belong to General Category, therefore, they knew the caste of the prosecutrix; there is specific bar under Section 19 of SC/ ST (Prevention of Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 04-11-2023 14:53:25

Atrocities) Act for grant of anticipatory bail.

17. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants.

18. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is rejected.

19. However, concerning police authorities are directed to ensure the necessary compliance of judgment dated 31.07.2023 passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.2207/2023 (Mohd. Ashfaq Alam Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others) regarding applicability of the provisions of Section 41 of Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Anushree

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 04-11-2023 14:53:25