Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vaibhav Dayal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 July, 2022
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY
ON THE 15th OF JULY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 30815 of 2022
Between:-
VAIBHAV DAYAL S/O SHRI TARACHANDRA
GOODWIN, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS WARD NO.02,
PRITHAVIPUR NIWARI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MANISH DATT, SR. COUNSEL WITH SHRI ESHAN DATT,
ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION PRITHAVIPUR, DISTT. NIWARI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. VICTIM A S/O NOT MENTION NOT MENTION
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. EKTA GUPTA, PANEL LAWYER FOR THE RESPONDENT
NO.1/STATE
NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2 DESPITE COMPLIANCE OF
SECTION 439(1)A OF CR.P.C BY THE STATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard with the aid of case diary.
T his is the first application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. Applicant Vaibhav Dayal was arrested on 8/5/2022 in connection with Crime Signature Not Verified SAN No.297/2022 registered at Police Station Prithavipur, Distt. Niwari for the Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2022.07.15 16:25:44 IST offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 506 of the IPC & 5n/6 of 2 POCSO Act.
A s per the prosecution case, on 16/11/2021 applicant committed rape with the prosecutrix, who was minor.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. The alleged offence is said to have committed on 16/11/2021, while prosecutrix lodged the report on 15/1/2022 and there is no plausible explanation regarding delay in lodging the FIR. Statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded by the trial Court. She did not support the prosecution story and turned hostile. Applicant has been in custody since 8/5/2022 and conclusion of trial will take time, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that applicant sexually exploited a minor girl, so he should not be released on bail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the contention of learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that the statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded by the trial Court, so there is no apprehension of tempering with the prosecution evidence by the applicant on releasing him on bail, he is in custody since 8/5/2022 and conclusion of trial will take time, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned CJM/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 the pendency of trial.
Signature Not Verified SANThis order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2022.07.15 16:25:44 IST conditions by the applicant :
31. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial;
3.The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE m/-
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2022.07.15 16:25:44 IST