Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mukesh Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 19 January, 2018
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-2258-2018
(MUKESH BAGHEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR)
Gwalior, Dated : 19-01-2018
Shri Hemant Singh Rana, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Devendra Chaubey, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Case diary is available.
sh This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
e ad The applicant has been arrested on 13/12/2017 in connection with Crime No.162/2017 registered by Police Pr Station Pichhore, District Gwalior for offence punishable a under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC.
hy It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that on ad 10/12/2017 at 15:15 hours one Ramavtar Baghel lodged a report in the police station alongwith his brother M Dharmendra, who is the husband of the prosecutrix that on of 9/12/2017 at about 7:00 in the evening the applicant was spreading rumors against the wife of Dharmendra rt (prosecutrix) and when he tried to convince not to act in such ou a manner, then the applicant abused him and he was beaten C by the applicant and other co-accused persons. It is submitted that in the said FIR, which was lodged in the h ig presence of the husband of the prosecutrix, no allegation H about commission of the offence was made. Thereafter, on 11/12/2017 at about 14:10 hours the prosecutrix lodged a FIR to the effect that on 9/12/2017 at about 6:30 in the evening she had gone to answer the call of the nature where she was raped by the applicant. It is submitted that if the applicant had really raped the prosecutrix, then there was no reason for the husband of the prosecutrix not to allege in that regard in the FIR, which was lodged on 10/12/2017. The explanation given by the prosecutrix in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement cannot be said to be plausible. The applicant is in jail from 13/12/2017 and the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.
Per contra, the application is opposed by the counsel for the respondent/State.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of detention and without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand Only) with sh one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial e Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court on the ad dates given by the concerned Court.
Pr This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
a Certified copy as per rules.
hy ad (G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE M Arun* of Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR rt MISHRA ou Date: 2018.01.23 16:51:04 +05'30' C h ig H