Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kali @ Devendra Rawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2019
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1
Cr.A.No.1551/2019
Kali alias Devendra Rawat Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Gwalior Bench Dated : 27.02.2019
Shri P.S. Bhadoriya, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Anuradha Singh, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1/State.
Shri D.K. Pathak, learned counsel for respondent No.2. With consent heard finally.
Present appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity 'the Act') against the order dated 25-01-2019 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Shivpuri whereby the application of the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail has been rejected.
Appellant is in custody since 24-12-2018 in connection with Crime No.598/2018 registered at Police Station Karera District Shivpuri for the offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 457, 506 of IPC, and under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(b)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the case is of false implication. The very nature of story as reflected in the FIR indicates that it is improbable. Children of the prosecutrix were sleeping behind her and it is highly improbable that in their presence without raising alarm, offence could have been committed. Statements of children indicate that the appellant was indulged in verbal altercation with the prosecutrix. Offence of rape has not been THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 Cr.A.No.1551/2019 referred by the children who were eye-witnesses of the case and appellant was implicated because he was witness in a case registered under Section 302 of IPC against some accused persons and did not waive recording of his evidence, therefore, as a counter-blast those accused persons managed prosecutrix for registration of false case against him. Although some criminal cases are pending against the appellant but they are also registered on false pretext. He undertakes to cooperate in trial and would make himself available as and when required by the trial Court. He further undertakes not to threat, induce or intimidate any of the witness of the case in any manner. Confinement since 24-12-2018 amounts to pretrial detention. Under these circumstances, prayer for grant of bail has been made.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and prayed for the dismissal of appeal.
Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of the bail application on the ground that applicant has criminal background.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and fact situation of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this appeal in the following terms.
It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 Cr.A.No.1551/2019 furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court on the condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during the trial This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant:-
1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. Appellant shall not contact the complainant through any means and shall not move in her vicinity/proximity in any manner.
8. Appellant shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to the complainant or to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court or police officer.
9. The appellant shall mark his attendance before the concerned Police Station on 15th of every month between 10 am to 2 pm till conclusion of trial, which shall be recorded in Rojnamcha.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.C. as per rules.
(Anand Pathak) Judge Anil* Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA Date: 2019.02.28 07:24:30 +05'30'