Madhya Pradesh High Court
Avinash @ Sheepu Samadhiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 February, 2020
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 Cr.A. No.1759/2020
(Avinash alias Sheepu Samadhiya Vs. State of M.P. )
Gwalior Bench
Dated :26/02/2020
Shri Gaurav Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Kshitiz Sharma, learned PP for respondent/State.
Shri Kuldeep Thapak, learned counsel for respondent No. 2/complainant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14-A (1)(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 4/10/2019 passed by trial Court; whereby, application of appellant preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Appellant has been arrested on 3/9/2019 by Police Station City Kotwali, District Bhind in connection with Crime No. 486/2019 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A,376 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (w) (ii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that false case has been registered against him and he is facing confinement since 3/9/2019; whereas, charge-sheet has already been filed. It is further submitted that it was a case of false promise of THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 Cr.A. No.1759/2020 (Avinash alias Sheepu Samadhiya Vs. State of M.P. ) marriage allegedly at the instance of appellant but from the statement of prosecutrix, it appears that she left her maternal home on her own volition. Without any criminal record, appellant is suffering confinement which amounts to pretrial detention. Appellant learnt the lesson hard way. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in trial and perform some community services.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer made by the appellant and prayed for dismissal of the criminal appeal.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the submissions advanced and looking to the fact situation but without commenting on the merits of the case, while setting aside the order dated 4/10/2019 passed by trial Court, appeal is allowed. It is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant :-
1- vkosnd Loa; }kjk fu"ikfnr can i= dh leLr fuca/kuks ,oa 'krksZ dk vuqikyu djsxkA 2- vkosnd vUos"[email protected] esa izdj.k ,oa funsZ'kkuqlkj lg;ksx THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 Cr.A. No.1759/2020 (Avinash alias Sheepu Samadhiya Vs. State of M.P. ) djsxkA 3- vkosnd ekeys ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh Hkh O;fDr dks izyksHku] /kedh vFkok opu nsus esa Lo;a dks fyIr ugha djsxk] tks fd mls@mldks ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky; ;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh ls izdVhdj.k djus ls izofjr djs] tSlh Hkh fLFkfr gks( 4- vkosnd ftl vijk/k dk vfHk;qDr gS oSlh gh izd`fr dk leku vijk/k dkfjr ugha djsxk( 5- vkosnd fopkj.k ds nkSjku vuko';d LFkxu dh ekWx ugh djsxkA vkosnd vfHk;ksfD= ds ?kj ds vklikl ds {ks= esa ugha tk,xk vkSj fdlh Hkh rjhds ls mlls laidZ djus dh dksfk'k'k ugha djsxk vU;Fkk xyr vkpj.k ds cgkus tekur jn~n dj nh tk,xh A 6- vkosnd fopkj.k U;k;ky;@vUos"k.k vf/kdkjh dh iwoZ vuqefr ds fcuk Hkkjr ugh NksMsxkA tSlh Hkh fLFkfr gks ,oa( 7- blds vfrfjDr mijksDr of.kZr tekur dk ykHk bl 'krZ ds v/khu gksxk fd vkosnd izR;sd xq:okj vkSj 'kqdzokj dks lqcg 9 cts ls nksigj 1 cts rd vkxkeh ,d o"kZ ds fy, ftyk vLirky] fHk.M esa viuh lsok,sa nsxk ,oa mldh Hkwfedk ckg~; foHkkx ds ejhtksa dks] MkWDVjksa ,oa dEikmUMjksa }kjk nh tkus okyh lsokvksa esa lgk;rk djus dh gksxhA mls uk rks "kY; d{k ¼vkWijs'ku fFk;sVj½ vkSj uk gh futh okMkasZ esa tkus dh vuqefr gksxh vkSj uk gh fdlh izdkj dh nokbZ ;k batsD'ku bR;kfn ejhtksa dks yxkus dh vuqefr gksxhA og fdlh Hkh izdkj ls vius }kjk ejhtksa dks ladze.k vFkok vlqfo/kk ugh nsxk vkSj MkWDVj bl ckr dks lqfuf'pr djssaxs] rkfd vkosnd mDr vLirky ds fy, ,d lgk;d dh Hkwfedk fuHkk, uk fd vius fdlh d`R; ls ejhtksa vFkok MkWDVjksa@vLirky iz'kklu dks fdlh izdkj dh vlqfo/kk dkfjr djsA ;g funZs'k vkosnd dh vk;q ,oa Hkfo"; dh laHkkoukvksa dks ns[kdj fn;k x;k gS rkfd mls lekt dh eq[; /kkjk esa vkus dk ,d volj izkIr gks ldsA eq[; fpfdRld ,oa LokLF; vf/kdkjh ¼CMHO½@vLirky v/kh{kd] ftyk fHk.M] vkosnd dks ckg~; foHkkx esa dk;Z djus dh vuqefr iznku djsaxs vkSj vkosnd dks fpfdRlk lsok,sa tSls %& lkQ lQkbZ dh O;oLFkk cuk, j[kuk] izkFkfed mipkj esa lg;ksx djuk] jftLVªs'ku dk;Z ,oa ejhtksa dh THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 Cr.A. No.1759/2020 (Avinash alias Sheepu Samadhiya Vs. State of M.P. ) lqfo/kkvksa dks /;ku esa j[kdj fd, tkus okys dk;Z nsaxsA bu dk;ksZa dks djus ls laHkor% vkosnd dks izkFkfed fpfdRlk vFkok izkd`frd vkinkvksa ls fuiVus dh izkFkfed f'k{kk fey ldsxh] rkfd og lekt dh eq[; /kkjk esa vkus ds lkFk&lkFk vius {ks= esa vkink izca/ku Loa;lsod ¼volunteer) ds rkSj ij dk;Z dj ldsA 8- ;gkWa ;g Li"V fd;k tkrk gS fd vkosnd vLirky@vLirky iz'kklu ,oa jksfx;ksa ds fy, fdlh Hkh izdkj ds laØe.k@vlqfo/kk vFkok ijs'kkuh dk dkj.k ugha cusxk ,oa vLirky iz'kklu }kjk mlds nqO;Zogkj vFkok voKkiw.kZ vkpj.k dh tkudkjh feyus dh fLFkfr esa ;g rF; mlds tekur vkosnu dks [kkfjt djus dk vk/kkj cu ldsxkA vkosnd }kjk lq/kkj ds fy, lq>ko vkSj mlds }kjk fd, x, dk;Z dk izfrosnu] ekpZ 2021 esa izLrqr fd, tk;saxsA 9- bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj ij fn, x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj] l`tu ,oa izd`fr ds lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL; LFkkfir fd;k tk ldsA orZeku esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d vax ds :i esa n;k] lsok] izse ,oaa d:a.kk dh izd`fr dks fodflr djus dh vko';drk gS D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh ewyHkwr izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA lacaf/kr eq[; fpfdRld vf/kdkjh dks lwfpr fd;k tk, ,oa fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks ,d ewyizfr vuqikyu ds fy, Hksth tk,A A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
C.C. as per rules.
(Anand Pathak) Judge jps/-
JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI 2020.02.27 10:10:07 +05'30'