Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Manoj Rai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 September, 2021

Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava

Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava

                                                                     1                               CRA-5076-2021
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       CRA-5076-2021
                                                 (MANOJ RAI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                    4
                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 27-09-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                          Shr Abdhesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
                                          Ms. Chhoti Kushram, Advocate for the complainant.
                                          Shri Santosh Yadav, P.L. for the respondent-State.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14-A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 18.08.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Satlapur in B.A. No. 314/2021 whereby application filed for grant of bail to the appellant has been dismissed.

The appellant is in custody since 14.08.2021 in connection with Crime No.159/2021 registered at Police Station-Satlapur Distt.-Panna, (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 450, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989.

As per prosecution on dated 12.08.2021, prosecutrix aged 27 years lodged the report against the appellant-accused stating therein that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe and appellant-accused is not member of SC/ST. Both are familiar with each other. Thereafter on dated 11.08.2021, appellant-accused committed intercourse with her on the false pretext of marriage. When she told him to solemnize marriage then appellant-accused has broke her mobile and refused to marry with her. They were in relationship for four months.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecutrix is aged 27 years.

Appellant-accused is 30 years. They were familiar with each other so they Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.09.27 17:01:47 IST 2 CRA-5076-2021 established relationship voluntarily. Appellant-accused did not commit any offence. Actually, some dispute arose between both the parties. Due to some confusion, prosecutrix lodged the report. Prosecutrix filed an affidavit in favour of the appellant-accused and she has no objection to grant bail to the appellant-accused. Appellant-accused is in custody since 14.08.2021. Investigation is complete. No further custodial interrogation is required in this case. Appellant is a labourer and bread earner of his family. If he will be kept in custody for unlimited period then future of his family will be spoiled. It is the time of pandemic COVID-19 due to which trial will take time for final disposal. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. On these grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays for grant of bail to the appellant.

Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection to grant bail to the appellant-accused.

Considering the contention of both the parties and the facts that appellant-accused and prosecutrix are adult, they were in relationship for some months, prosecutrix also filed an affidavit to grant bail to the appellant-accused, appellant-accused is in custody since 14.08.2021, investigation is complete, no further custodial interrogation is required in this case, it is the time of COVID-19 pandemic due to which trial will take time to conclude, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, so in view of this Court, it would not be appropriate to keep the appellant in jail during whole trial, therefore without commenting on merits of the case, appeal of the appellants under Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed. The order dated 18.08.2021 passed by Special Sessions Judge SC/ST (Atrocities) Act in B.A. No. 314/2021 is hereby set-aside.

3 CRA-5076-2021 I t is directed that accused/appellant-Manoj Rai be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the same like amount to the satisfaction of the learned JMFC concerned or trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court. It is directed that the appellant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C .In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the appellant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority:-

1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the appellant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The appellant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the appellant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

Certified copy as per rules.

Appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE Pallavi Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.09.27 17:01:47 IST