Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pawan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 November, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 21 st OF NOVEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44679 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
PAWAN S/O OMPRAKASH BANJARA, AGED 20 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABORER R/O VILALGE BHATBARDI P.S.
SATWAS DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MOHAMMED ANAS SHEIKH - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION SATWAS DISTT. DEWAS
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM X THROUGH POLICE STATION SATWAS
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( SHRI ANAND BHATT - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR STATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the third application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail relating to Crime
No. 221/2021 registered at Police Station Satwas District Dewas (M.P.) for the
offence under Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(2)(n), 452, 502 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act.
2. As per prosecution story, father of prosecutrix lodged a missing
person report at police station Satwas District Dewas by stating that her minor
daughter/prosecutrix is missing from home and he had doubted upon the
present applicant Pawan. During investigation, it has been gathered that present
applicant abducted the prosecurix, took her with him to Omkareshwar and on
the pretext of marriage has committed rape upon her. Accordingly, offence has
been registered against the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an
innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in
custody since 14.6.2021. Applicant is a young person of 20 years of age. The
prosecution has examined only four witnesses in last two years and despite the
order dated 12.1.2023 passed by this court the trial court has not concluded the
trial yet as such the mandatory provisions of Section 35 of POCSO Act has not
been complied with by the trial court. The case is pending before the Additional
District Judge who is not designated as a special court for hearing trial of the
offence under POCSO Act. He has placed reliance upon judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex court in the matter of Gokarakonda Naga Saobaba Vs State
of Maharashtra reported in (2018) 12 SCC 505, order dated 16.2.2023
passed by this court in the matter of Aasim Khan Vs. State of MP in
M.Cr.C. No. 7438/2023. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of
bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit
and proper.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail
application and prays for its rejection by submitting that one more criminal
antecedent for the offence under section 354 of IPC has been found against the
applicant, he is a habitual offender, hence he does not deserve for bail.
5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.
6. A perusal of the record reflects that trial is still continuing. Vide order
dated 12.1.2023 this court had directed the trial court to make all endeavour to
conclude the trial as early as possible, but this court has not given any specific
period to the trial court for concluding the trial. Now special court has been
designated in Dewas therefore, case is pending before the Additional Sessions
Judge Dewas. The reason for delay in trial appears to be bonafide. The
prosecutrix has been examined before the trial court but her statement was not
produced by applicant.
7. In view of the evidence available on record, this court is not inclined to
grant regular bail to applicant.
8. Hence this third bail application filed by applicant under section 439
Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
BDJ
