Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravi Parmar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 March, 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 15 th OF MARCH, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3907 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
RAVI PARMAR S/O RAJARAM PARMAR, AGED ABOUT
24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O VILLAGE
BARKHERA BURJOOG UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI MANU MAHESHWARI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
MAHIDPUR, DISTT. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM X THROUGH P.S. MAHIDPUR UJJAIN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....NON-APPLICANTS
(SHRI VIRAJ GODHA, PANEL LAWYER FOR STATE)
(NONE FOR VICTIM, THOUGH SERVED)
This application coming on for order this day, th e 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/accused, relating to FIR/Crime No.478/2022 dated (not mentioned) registered at Police Station - Mahidpur, District Ujjain (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n), 344 and 346 of IPC alongwith 3/4(2), 5(l)/6 and 5(n)/6 of the Protection of Signature Not Verified Signed by: GEETA PRAMOD Signing time: 15-03-2024 18:40:44 2 Children from Sexual Offences Act.
2. Prosecution story, in brief is that at the time of incident, prosecutrix was minor, aged around 14 years 06 months. Prior to the date of incident, there was friendship between the applicant and prosecutrix. On 27.10.2022, on the false pretext of marriage, applicant took the prosecutrix to Ujjain by motorcycle. Thereafter, he took her to Indore, Ratlam, Gujarat and Rajasthan and kept her captivated for around 11 months meanwhile, he committed rape upon her repeatedly.
3 . Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that the applicant has not committed the offence and he has falsely been implicated in the case.
After filing of charge-sheet, prosecutrix (PW-1) and her father (PW-2) have been examined before the Trial Court but both of them have completely turned hostile and have not supported the case of prosecution. Both the witnesses have admitted in their cross-examination that year of birth of prosecutrix is 2002 therefore, it is submitted that the prosecutrix was more than 18 years of age at the time of incident therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. Applicant is in custody since 19.09.2023. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
4 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicant/State has opposed the prayer and prayed for rejection of the application.
5. Having considered the rival submissions and after perusal of the case diary so also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail hence, the application is allowed.
6. It is directed that the applicant - Ravi Parmar shall be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Signature Not Verified Signed by: GEETA PRAMOD Signing time: 15-03-2024 18:40:44 3 Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Trial Court during pendency of the trial. It is further directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
7. This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
8. With the aforesaid, this application is allowed and stands disposed of. Certified copy, as per Rules.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE gp Signature Not Verified Signed by: GEETA PRAMOD Signing time: 15-03-2024 18:40:44