Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ullu @ Jitendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 February, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 3 rd OF FEBRUARY, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5415 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ULLU @ JITENDRA S/O RAMESH BARELA, AGED ABOUT
22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE
KHOBRAPURA PANWA DISTRICT BARWANI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI ANIKET NAIK - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION PALSUD
DISTRICT BARWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(MS.MAMTA SHANDILYA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is first application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant in connection with Crime No.407/2022 registered at Police Station - Palsud, Barwani (M.P.) under Section 365, 366, 368, 376, 506 of the IPC.
As per the prosecution case, the prosecutrix had gone alongwith the applicant and other co-accused person on motorcycle from village of her uncle. Thereafter, she was taken a room and she was threatened to kill and thereafter, the applicant committed rape with her. The incident is said to have taken place on 30.10.2022 and the report has been lodged after four days i.e. on Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 03/02/2023 6:03:40 PM 2 04.11.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecutrix is a major girl and he has been falsely implicated in the incident. There is a delay of four days in lodging the report.
Learned counsel for the respondent/state has opposed the prayer on the ground that in the report there is specific allegation of committing rape against the applicant.
After taking into consideration the prosecutrix case and the fact that the applicant herself had gone alongwith the accused persons on motorcycle and stayed in a room without raising any alarm. There is no external injury mark on the person prosecutrix in medical report. Further, there is a delay of four days in lodging the report. The applicant is in custody since 10.11.2022. The investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed. No further custodial interrogation is required, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
It is directed that applicant shall be released from custody upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.
The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance with the order passed by the Supreme Court IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU "W.P. (C) No.1/2020" and ensure that the applicant is examined by the jail doctor before his/her release. If the applicant shows symptoms of COVID-19, the doctor shall forthwith direct him/her to be produced before the appropriate hospital designated for the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 03/02/2023 6:03:40 PM 3 detection and treatment of COVID-19 patients. If the doctor is of the opinion that the applicant is not affected with the virus, the jail authorities shall ensure his/her transportation from the jail till his/her place of residence.
A typed copy of this order is being forwarded to the Office of the Advocate General, on their email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned. The office is requested to forward a copy of this order to the court below.
C.c. as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Sourabh Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 03/02/2023 6:03:40 PM