Pavan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 June, 2022

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Pavan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 June, 2022

Bench: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

                                   1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                                 BEFORE
              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                           ON THE 21st OF JUNE, 2022

                MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 29502 of 2022

         Between:-
1.       PAVAN S/O RAJENDRA TYAGI , AGED ABOUT 30
         YEARS, VILL BAGHEL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.       RAMNETRA S/O SHRI INDRALAL TYAGI , AGED
         ABOUT    36  YEARS, VILLAGE BADARPURA
         TEHSIL JAURA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               .....APPLICANTS
         (BY SHRI PURAN KULSHRESTHA- ADVOCATE)

         AND

1.       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
         POLICE STATION P.S. JOURA (MADHYA
         PRADESH)

2.       ABHIYOKTRI    S/O   N/A THROUGH THANA
         PRABHARI PS JAURA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
         (BY SHRI SUSHANT TIWARI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
         SHRI NAROTTAM SHARMA- ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
         NO.2/COMPLAINANT)

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

This is the First bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C filed by the applicants for grant of bail.

Applicants have been arrested on 25.2.2022 & 28.2.2022 respectively by police Station, Jaura, Distt. Morena, in connection with crime No.119/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 3/4 2 of the POCSO Act.

In brief, the prosecution case is that on 19.2.2022 a Gumshudgi report was lodged at PS Jaura by father of the prsoecutrix that on 18.2.2022 at about 8.30 PM, his daughter aged about 17 years is missing and he doubted that probably, she was eloped with Ankit Tyagi. On his report, Gumshudgi report No.49 of 2022 was recorded. Prosecutrix was recovered on 20.2.2022. Her statement was recorded wherein, she stated that she is aged about 17 years three months. Her family members want to marry her, but she does want to do so. Due to this, she was annoyed, and therefore, on 18.2.2022, she sat in a bus at Jaura and reached Morena at 7.00 PM. Thereafter, she again boarded a bus at Morena and reached Gwalior at 8.30 PM. From Gwalior, she caught a sleeper bus to Bhopal around 10.30 PM and reached Bhopal next day at about 8 AM. After reaching Bhopal, she telephoned her friend co-accused Ankit and he told her that her family members have lodged a report against him and you should return. Co-accused Anit has not taken the prosecutrix and she herself went to Bhopal, therefore, on 19th in the morning, she sat in a train and reached Gwalior and thereafter on 20th she reached Morena. Co-accused Ankit or anybody else has not done any wrong with her. Initially, the offence was registered under Section 363 and 366 of IPC and later on, Section 376 of IPC and other sections were added. Allegations against the applicants are that they took away the prosecutrix on 18.2.2022 from her house. Applicants were arrested. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. They are in custody since 25.2.2022 & 28.2.2022 respectively. Co-accused Ankit has been released on bail by this Court. Investigation has been complete and charge-sheet has been filed. They undertake to cooperate in trial and to abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court. On such premises, learned counsel for the applicants prayed for bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of the application.

Both the Advocates are heard. Case diary perused.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that if applicants furnish bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, they should be released on bail.

They will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance. Certified copy as per rules.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ms/-

MADHU SOODAN PRASAD 2022.06.21 17:40:03 +05'00'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court