Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 2]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Aashi Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 December, 2022

Author: Pranay Verma

Bench: Pranay Verma

                                                            1
                           IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                            ON THE 14 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                        MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 59021 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          AASHI KHAN S/O ARSHAD KHAN, AGED ABOUT 38
                          YEAR S, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS MALWA STEEL KI
                          GALI NO. 1 LOHE KA POOL TOPKHANA DISTRICT
                          UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI APOORV JOSHI - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                HOUSE OFFICER THROGH POLICE STATION
                                NANAKHEDA, DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    PROSECUTRIX X THROUGH P.S. NANAKHEDA
                                UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI HITENDRA TRIPATHI - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
                          (BY ASHISH AWASTHI - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 OBJECTOR)

                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

1. This is the First application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as the applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.633/2022 registered at Police Station Nanakheda, District Ujjain (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 376, 376 (2) (N),366 of IPC.

2. The applicant is in custody since 03.12.2022.

Signature Not Verified

3. As per the prosecution, a report was lodged by the prosecutrix to the Signed by: RASHMI PRASHANT Signing time: 16-Dec-22 2:03:01 PM 2 effect that she had known the applicant since 2019. On 05-05-2020 the applicant had stated that he likes her and wants to marry her and thereafter on 20-05-2020 he committed rape upon her in Mumbai on the false pretext of marriage. Thereafter also he repeated the said act. Without informing her he came from Mumbai to Ujjain after which she lodged a report against him at Oshiwara West Police station at Mumbai. On 22-06-2022 the applicant came to Ujjain to meet her and again committed rape upon her on false pretext of marriage. She became pregnant, but he again committed rape upon her on 27- 10-2022 and thereafter took her to Mumbai. They returned on 01-11-2022 to Ujjain where the applicant left the prosecutrix and disappeared. Upon the report lodged by the prosecutrix the applicant has been implicated and arrested for the present offence.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. Though the allegation against him is of committing rape upon the prosecutrix on false pretext of marriage, but despite the applicant not marrying her she continued to have physical relationship with him. Even after being released on bail in the earlier case registered by the prosecutrix, the applicant did not marry her yet she had physical relationship with him. It is hence a clear case of consent and love affair between the parties and it is only on account of marriage not having been performed between them the instant report has been lodged. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix has herself filed an affidavit in this application stating that she has no objection in case of grant of bail to the applicant. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.

5. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI PRASHANT Signing time: 16-Dec-22 2:03:01 PM 3 respondent/State submitting that in view of the allegations leveled against the applicant and the material collected by the prosecution against him, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

6. Learned counsel for the prosecutrix submits that the prosecutrix has no objection in case of grant of bail to the applicant and she has filed an application bearing IA No. 16195/2022 in that regard which is supported by her affidavit also.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary.

8. The allegation against the applicant is of committing rape upon the prosecutrix on false pretext of marriage. Despite the applicant not marrying her, despite her repeated demands for the same and despite her having already lodged an FIR against him at Oshiwara West Police Station in Mumbai, she continued to have physical relationship with him. Thus, it cannot prima facie be said to be a case of committing rape on false pretext of marriage and from the allegation it appears to be a case of non-performance of marriage between the parties. Thus, in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

9. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-

(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

10. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI PRASHANT Signing time: 16-Dec-22 2:03:01 PM 4 of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE rashmi Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHMI PRASHANT Signing time: 16-Dec-22 2:03:01 PM