Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh @ Bhaiyu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 December, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MP 1694
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 CRA-9554-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-9554-2019
(RAJESH @ BHAIYU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 02-12-2019
Shri Z.M. Shah, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Shivam Hazari, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
None for the respondent No.2/complainant despite compliance of provision of Section 15(A)(III) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by the respondent No.1.
Case diary perused and arguments heard.
This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 against the order dated 23.10.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Burhanpur, in SC ATR No.21/2019, whereby learned Special Judge rejected the bail application filed by appellant Rajesh @ Bhaiyu under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to get bail in Crime No.390/2019 registered at Police Station Nepa Nagar, District Burhanpur for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 365, 506, 374/34 of IPC, Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Section 3 (1)(w), 3 (2)
(v), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
A s per the prosecution case, on 16.08.2019 at 10:00 AM, when the prosecutrix was going to Government Higher Secondary School, Nepa Nagar, on the way, near Ekta Nagar, appellant Rajesh and co-accused Prashik and Prafulla came there on bike and abducted the prosecutrix and took her in a forest where co-accused Prafulla committed rape with the prosecutrix. On that, police registered Crime No.390/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 365, 506, 34 of IPC Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Section 3 (1) (w), 3 (2)(v), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and arrested the appellant on 20.08.2019. On that, appellant filed an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for releasing him on bail, which was rejected by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act vide order dated 23.10.2019. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, appellant filed this Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 03/12/2019 10:52:46 2 CRA-9554-2019 Criminal Appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is further submitted that in the FIR and in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of CrPC by JMFC, the prosecutrix did not depose that co-accused Prafulla committed rape with her. Even otherwise, there is no allegation against the appellant that he committed rape with the prosecutrix. Charge sheet has been filed. The appellant is in custody since 20.08.2019 and the conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the appellant on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that appellant Rajesh and co-accused Prashik and Prafulla abducted the prosecutrix and co-accused Prafulla committed rape with the prosecutrix. So, he should not be released on bail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no allegation against the appellant that he committed rape with the prosecutrix, appellant has no criminal past, he is in custody since 20.08.2019, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, without commenting on merit, the appeal is allowed and it is directed that the appellant Rajesh @ Bhaiyu be released on bail upon 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 C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the concerned Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant :
1.The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2.The appellant will cooperate in the trial;
3.The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat o r promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 03/12/2019 10:52:46
3 CRA-9554-2019 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer;
4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5.The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6.The appellant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE (ra) Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 03/12/2019 10:52:46