Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ghanshyam Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 May, 2021
Author: Shailendra Shukla
Bench: Shailendra Shukla
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M. Cr. C. No.15512/2021
(Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of M. P.)
-1-
Indore, dated 27/05/2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Palash Choudhary, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent /
State.
Shri Amar Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the objector. Shri Gaurav Tiwari, Investigating Officer is also present through Video Conferencing.
Submissions were made on first bail application preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in respect of Crime No.96/2021 registered at Police Station Lasudiya, District Indore, for allegedly committing offence under Sections 342, 323, 506 and 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 66 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000.
The prosecution story in short is that the prosecutrix, who is a married lady, was having matrimonial problems with their husband. The applicant is a "Priest" and he claims to eradicate the problems as per the "tenets of Shastras" and took the prosecutrix in confidence and later on sedated her with some intoxicating substance and established physical relationship with her. Thereafter, showed some photographs to the prosecutrix and threatened her that he would make this photographs viral and compelled her to enter into marriage alliance with him.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M. Cr. C. No.15512/2021 (Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of M. P.) -2- Learned counsel for the applicant submits that prosecutrix had got acquainted with him, love relations developed between them which ended with marriage ceremony and the marriage ceremony photographs have been submitted for perusal. He further submits that charge sheet has already been filed.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned Panel Lawyer for the State and Shri Amar Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the objector have appeared and submitted that prosecutrix was in fact compelled to enter into such ceremony about which she was not aware and it was due to the pressure mounted upon her at the behest of the applicant, which amounted to blackmailing her and therefore, she was compelled to enter into marriage alliance.
However, the prosecutrix came to know that the applicant had indulged in similar activities with number of other girls. The fact pertaining to which was reveal after perusing a "Pen Drive", which the applicant had accidentally left behind. It has been mentioned that the Pen Drive reveals more than 170 photographs, some of which were of very obscene character and this Court had on earlier occasion asked for some of such photographs for perusal. The aforesaid photographs have been placed in a sealed envelope, which have been perused. Some of these photographs are pornographic in character, which relates to other ladies.
The Investigating Officer has appeared and stated that in this HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M. Cr. C. No.15512/2021 (Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of M. P.) -3- matter although charge sheet has been filed but additional investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. is still going on and Investigating Officer is still collecting the evidence pertaining to the allegations made by the prosecutrix in this matter.
Shri Verma, learned Panel Lawyer has submitted that the mere fact that the applicant has stored such photographs, depict his intention to use such photographs at some point of time in blackmailing those girls and that the applicant who is known to perform religious activities is actually indulging in obscene activity under the garb of a pious work of being a Pandit, which is in itself puts the character of the applicant in cloud. Under such circumstances, his firm objection has been made against grant of bail.
At this point of time, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the photographs of the marriage itself shows that prosecutrix has entered into marriage with the applicant in the presence of her family members and it was the applicant who came to know that the prosecutrix was a married lady. In fact it is the applicant who has been cheated and not the prosecutrix.
Considered the aforesaid statements.
While considering the bail application, the background and the character of an accused assumes importance. Storing of such huge collection of photographs by the applicant depicting himself in compromising position with different ladies is a fact which cannot be HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M. Cr. C. No.15512/2021 (Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of M. P.) -4- outrightly looked over.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that these photographs may be photo shopped. However, such photographs whether are photo shopped or not, is a matter of evidence. On first perusal these photographs do not appeared to be photo shopped. The storing of such photographs in large number by the applicant performing religious rituals puts a question mark on his character. If the applicant was in fact cheated by the prosecutrix than it has not been shown when the applicant came to know about such cheating. The application contains no mention of any date or any person from whom the applicant came to know about such fact. The applicant is five years younger to the prosecutrix and both belongs to different communities.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the fact about the earlier marriage of the prosecutrix came to be known to the applicant in the month of January-2021 because the certified copy of the Court's order has been obtained in the month of January-2021.
This submission was considered.
Learned counsel for the applicant has not denied that the prosecutrix had come to him in order to get remedy regarding several problems, which she was facing. What were these problems, has not been narrated by the learned counsel. It is clear that acquaintance between the applicant and the prosecutrix took place in connection HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE M. Cr. C. No.15512/2021 (Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of M. P.) -5- with the vocation of applicant which involved solving the problems coming in the life of persons in their daily life. Thus, it is clear that the prosecutrix had come in contact with the applicant in connection with her own problems and applicant has not been able to show as to what were these problems. Thus, the presumption is that the problems which prosecutrix narrated to him were regarding her matrimonial problems but the applicant as per prosecution story took advantage of this fact and committed the act as alleged later on, which culminated in filing of this FIR.
Looking to the gravity of the allegation, photographs placed on record and the factum of additional investigation, no case is made out for grant of bail.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant made a prayer to refresh the application after completion of additional investigation. Such liberty is being given, however, the application filed at that point of time will again be looked into the facts and situation prevailing which will include the present observations made by this Court.
With the aforesaid liberty, bail application stands dismissed. The photographs filed may be handed over to the Investigating Officer in a sealed envelope.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SHAILENDRA SHUKLA) VACATION JUDGE Tej Digitally signed by TEJPRAKASH VYAS Date: 2021.05.28 10:43:46 -07'00'