Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deepak Ivne vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 August, 2017
MCRC-10598-2017
(DEEPAK IVNE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
09-08-2017
Shri K.S. Rajput, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri A.S. Pathak, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent-
State.
Heard.
This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
The applicant is in custody since 03.06.2017 in connection with Crime No.32/2017 registered at Police Station Kesla, Tehsil Itarsi, District Hoshangabad (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(z) of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act.
As per prosecution, applicant is known to prosecutrix, he met her on 14.3.2017 in Bheelatdev Fair, took her on promise to drop at her residence, but he took her in an agricultural field of his Village, kept her there for eight days, then left her at the residence of her aunt (Mausi). Thereafter, the applicant came there and took her on promise to marry from the the house of aunt (Mausi) and on way, in the field, he committed rape upon her and then left her at a Dhaba near her Village. Thereafter, she returned to her house, narrated the incident to her mother and report of the incident was lodged in the concerned police station.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that as per statement of prosecutrix herself applicant and prosecutrix love each other. She herself accompanied the applicant. She is a major girl. As per school record, her date of birth is 14.11.1999, therefore, at the time of incident, age of the prosecutrix was 17 years 4 months. There is no criminal antecedent against the applicant. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Per-contra, learned Govt. Advocate opposes the bail application.
After hearing arguments of the parties, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and role of prosecutrix, it would be appropriate to release the applicant on bail, therefore without commenting on merits of the case, application of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.
It is directed that applicant-Deepak Ivne be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or trial Court for his appearance before them on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(H.P. SINGH) JUDGE A.Praj.