Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anil Sikarwar @ Anil Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 April, 2024

Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta

Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
                                                  ON THE 1 st OF APRIL, 2024
                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9795 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           ANIL SIKARWAR @ ANIL THAKUR S/O DEVILAL, AGED
                           ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOB R/O 137 GNT
                           MARKET DHAR ROAD, DIST. INDORE (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR RAWAL, ADVOCATE.)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                 HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                 GHATIYA DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    VICTIM X THROUGH P.S. GHATIYA DIST. UJJAIN
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI HEMANT SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE.)
                           (NONE FOR THE PROSECUTRIX THOUGH SERVED.)

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

                           following:
                                                               ORDER

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant, in connection with FIR/Crime No.276/2023, Date:-(Not mentioned) registered at P.S.-Ghatiya, District- Ujjain (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(1), 376 (3), 376(2)(h), 344, 506 of the IPC and sections 3, 4, 5(j)(ii), 6, 5(l) and 5(q) of the POCSO Act.

2. Prosecution story, in brief is that at the time of the incident, the prosecutrix was 13 years of age. On 29/06/2023, she filed a written complaint stating that her mother is deserted wife of her husband, therefore, the prosecutrix and her mother used to live in the house of the applicant situated at his farmland. Both of them were working as labours at his agricultural land. In year 2020 when the mother of the prosecutrix was confined in jail, the prosecutrix started to live alone, meanwhile, the applicant committed rape upon her for several times. The applicant used to lock the prosecutrix in the room and used to intimidate her to not disclose about the incident to anyone. Therefore, the prosecutrix got pregnant and she gave birth to a daughter on 26/10/2021 in a nursing home situated at Ujjain, where the applicant had mentioned wrong age of the prosecutrix and had mentioned himself as the husband of the prosecutrix at the medical documents. When mother of the prosecutrix was released from the jail, she found that the prosecutrix was not in the same house and the house was also demolished. She started to search the prosecutrix. Later on mother of the prosecutrix found that applicant had kept the prosecutrix in a rented room at Tirupati Gold Colony. When she found the prosecutrix, the applicant had given her life threat as well. The mother of the prosecutrix then returned to her village at Galpura, Ujjain. On 20/06/2023 at 07:30 PM, when the prosecutrix was alone at house, then the applicant had again come to the house of the prosecutrix and tried to break in by kicking the door. When the prosecutrix shouted, her neighbours came and called the police, on which the applicant had fled away. The matter was reported on 29/06/2023 against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant/ accused submits that, the applicant Signature Not Verified has not committed the offence and has falsely been implicated in the case. It is Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 02-04-2024 17:38:38 3 submitted that age of the prosecutrix is mentioned as 19 years in document relating to her treatment. It is also submitted that name of the applicant is mentioned as father of the child born by the prosecutrix. It is also submitted that the prosecutrix was a major woman and consenting party for the sexual intercourse. Therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 04/07/2023. After investigation chargesheet has been filed. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

4. On other hand learned counsel for the non-applicant/ State has opposed the prayer and submits that as per scholar register the prosecutrix was minor aged around 13 years. She is a labour and the applicant committed aforementioned offence upon the prosecutrix when her mother was not present with her by keeping the prosecutrix under continuous intimidation. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties, perused the case-diary also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of this court, it is not a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. Resultantly, application for bail is rejected.

(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE ajit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 02-04-2024 17:38:38