Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Chotu @ Pawan Lodhi (Patel) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 July, 2021

Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava

Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava

                                                                          1                           MCRC-33729-2021
                                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                         MCRC-33729-2021
                                                  (CHOTU @ PAWAN LODHI (PATEL) Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                        Jabalpur, Dated : 16-07-2021
                                              Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                              Shri K.K. Kushwaha, Advocate for the applicant.
                                              Shri Kishore Roy, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The applicant is in custody since 20.1.2021, in connection with Crime No.529/2020, registered at Police Station Themi, District Narsinghpur (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 366(KA), 368, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of IPC & Sec. 5, 6 of POCSO Act.

As per prosecution, on 11.12.2020 at about 9:00 PM, prosecutrix aged 17 years was missing from her house. She was searched, but she was not found. FIR was lodged. Thereafter, prosecutrix was recovered on 20.1.2021. It is alleged by prosecution that accused/applicant kidnapped her and committed intercourse with her.

L e a r n e d counsel for the applicant submits that accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. At the time of incident, prosecutrix was above 18 years. Accused/applicant is also 24 years. Both love each other, but parents of prosecutrix were not ready, so prosecutrix voluntarily came to the accused/applicant. Thereafter, they ran away, they solemnised marriage at temple, but prosecutrix was recovered and accused/applicant was arrested, then prosecutrix was pressurised to give false statement against the accused/applicant. During the investigation, statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded before JMFC, in which prosecutrix stated that prosecutrix and accused/applicant solemnized marriage, so no case is made out against the accused/applicant. Accused/applicant is in custody since 20.1.2021. Charge sheet has been filed. It is the time of COVID-19, so proceedings before the trial Court is withheld and conclusion of trial will take long time in its Signature Not Verified SAN final hearing. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2021.07.19 12:30:49 IST 2 MCRC-33729-2021 with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is bread earner of his family and if he is kept in custody for an unlimited period, then future of his family will be spoiled. The accused/ applicant ready to furnish bail as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer, opposes the bail application. After hearing arguments of the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that age of prosecutrix is disputed, prosecutrix herself admitted this fact that she and accused/applicant already solemnized marriage in the temple, so it appears that it is a matter of love affairs, accused/applicant is in jail since 20.1.2021, charge sheet has been filed, it is the time of COVID- 19, so conclusion of trial will take long time, applicant is bread earner of his family, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, it would not be appropriate to keep the applicant in jail during whole trial, therefore without commenting on merits of the case, application of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that applicant-Chotu @ Pawan Lodhi (Patel) be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one surety of the same amount each to the satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the applicant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-

1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The applicant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests Signature Not Verified SAN will be carried out.

3 MCRC-33729-2021

3 . If it is found that the applicant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.

State is directed to intimate about this order to the Victim by supplying a copy of this order.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE A.Praj.