Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj Kushwaha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 January, 2019
1 MCRC-52729-2018
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-52729-2018
(MANOJ KUSHWAHA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 08-01-2019
Shri J.N.Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Saurabh Shrivastava, learned Deputy Government Advocate for
the respondent/State.
Heard. Case diary perused.
Heard on this second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
filed on behalf of the applicant.
The earlier bail application i.e. M.Cr.C.No.13867/2018 has been dismissed on 10/05/2018 on merits with the observation that although the element of consent of the prosecutrix seems to be there but because she is minor and allegation of recording the video of the incident and made it viral, so the bail application of the applicant was rejected with the liberty to renew his bail again after the examination of the prosecutrix.
This second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant in connection with Crime No.66/2018 registered by P.S. Baikunthpur District Rewa (MP) for offences punishable under Section 454, 450, 376(2), 506(Part-II) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and section 66/67 of I.T. Act.
As per the case of the prosecution, on 15/02/2018 at about 10.00 p.m., when the prosecutrix aged about 17 years was in her house, applicant entered into her house and committed forceful intercourse with her and has taken some videos and photographs of the prosecutrix in objectionable conditions. Later on, again on 02/03/2018, applicant has entered into the house of prosecutrix and made physical relation by threatening to viral the videos and photographs. It is also alleged that applicant has send some videos and photographs to whom where the prosecutrix going to be married. Prosecutrix has narrated the whole incidence to her family members. Thereafter, she Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 09/01/2019 02:07:07 2 MCRC-52729-2018 lodged a report against the applicant. On that basis, above said crime has been registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any crime and has falsely been implicated in the case. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is ready to furnish bail as per the order and shall abide by all conditions as may be imposed by the Court. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 13/03/2018 and the trial will take long time for its final disposal. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
It is pertinent to mention that statement of prosecutrix (PW-1), her sister-in-law Ranu Kushwaha (PW-2) and her uncle Ramgopal Kushwaha (PW-3) have been recorded, they have not supported the case of the prosecution.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the fact that prosecutrix and her family members have not supported the case and looking to the period of detention of applicant, in the opinion of this Court, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
Consequently, this application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of applicant is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that Court on all dates fixed in the case and for complying with the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MOHD. FAHIM ANWAR) JUDGE manju Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 09/01/2019 02:07:07 3 MCRC-52729-2018 Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 09/01/2019 02:07:07