Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manojpuri Goswami vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 October, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 35773/2018
(Manojpuri Goswami Vs. State of M.P.)
Jabalpur, Dated: 24.10.2018
Shri Aditya Adhikari Sr. Advocate with Shri Chandra
Puri learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Narendra Chourasia, learned Dy.Government
Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Shashank Pandey, learned counsel for the objector. Heard.
Perused case diary.
This is the first application under Section 438 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.
Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.49/18 registered at Police Station Pachmarhi Distt. Hoshangabad for the offences under Sections 354, 354-D, 509 of IPC.
As per the prosecution story, the complainant who is a lady constable posted in the Police Training School, Pachmarhi since 9.6.2018 and the present applicant, who is Head Constable also posted there as Rojnamcha Incharge. It is alleged that the complainant used to have normal conversations with the present applicant in the beginning, however on 8.7.2018 when the complainant was sitting in the Rojnamcha room alongwith the present applicant and few others, the applicant is said to have made some unusual and unwarranted comments about her. It has also been alleged by the complainant that on 18.7.2018 while she was returning from the SP Office, the applicant caught hold of her hand and tried to kiss her, on which the complainant resisted and threatened him that she will tell everybody about his acts, 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH despite which the applicant did not stop and she barely managed to escape from there. It is also alleged that the applicant after the said incident continued to stalk her and call/message her from various numbers, and is harassing her for the past two months. On the said allegations, the FIR was registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is an innocent persons and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is having a good service track record. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complainant because the applicant being Rojnamcha in-charge has made certain entries regarding her negligence in performing duties relating to reporting in the outdoor unit and also in the Rojnamcha section for imparting of parade training to her while posted in Police Training School, Pachmarhi. It is urged that the applicant is a government servant and there is no possibility of his absconding. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, a prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
Per-contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the bail application.
The applicant has filed some documents. On going through the same it seems that he was posted in Police Training School, Pachmarhi as Rojnamcha Writer. From the entry dated 27.7.2018 of Rojnamcha, it seems that the applicant being Rojnamcha Writer made certain entries against the prosecutrix, who is said to be a constable posted in the Police Training School, Pachmarhi regarding her negligence in performing her duties and for the said entries the prosecutrix 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH has submitted her explanation. From perusal of the FIR, it seems that the complainant's mobile number is 8120891232. The applicant has filed the call details of his mobile phone number 9424645422 from 10.6.2018 to 10.8.2018 which shows that the applicant and prosecutrix were very much in contact of each other and used to talk on mobile phone frequently even after the said incident of 8.7.2018.
At this stage when considering the application for anticipatory bail of the applicant, it is not proper to go through the merits and demerits of the case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents which are filed by the applicant, this Court deems it proper to grant anticipatory bail to applicant. Consequently, this anticipatory bail application is allowed.
The applicant is directed that in the event of his arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The applicant shall abide by the conditions as enumerated under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. The applicant shall remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when they are directed so and also appear before the trial Court.
Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.
(Mohd. Fahim Anwar) Judge skm Digitally signed by SANTOSH MASSEY Date: 2018.10.29 17:32:10 +05'30'