Madhya Pradesh High Court
Aman Jangam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 August, 2015
M.Cr.C. No.8407/2015
(Aman Jangam Vs. State of MP)
24.08.2015
Shri Rajendra Singh Yadav, Advocate for applicant.
Shri G.S. Chauhan, Panel Lawyer for Respondent/State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this 1st bail application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Kotwali, District Sheopur in connection with Crime No.160/2015 registered in relation to the offences punishable u/Ss. 376, 456, 506 of IPC & 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
The applicant is in custody since 19.05.2015, the chargsheet has been filed, where allegation against the applicant is of house tress-pass and rape.
Reading of the statement of prosecutrix whose date of birth is 01.02.1999 as per the school report card as against the date of incident being 19.05.2015 though indicates allegation of rape, but MLC report does not disclose any injury on the body of the prosecutrix. The aspect which deserves consideration is that M.Cr.C. No.8407/2015 on earlier occasion in Crime No. 311/14, the same prosecutrix had alleged similar offence against the applicant and later in her statement u/S 164 Cr.P.C., she has resiled from her original stand made in statement recorded u/S 161 Cr.P.C by contending that her father has falsely made allegation against the applicant. There is relationship of landlord and tenant between the applicant and the prosecutrix and therefore in the given facts and circumstances, the possibility of over/false implication cannot be ruled out, specially when the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the early conclusion of the trial is a bleak possibility and prolonged pre-trial detention is anathema to the concept of liberty and the material placed on record does not discloses the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fiftey Thousand only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;M.Cr.C. No.8407/2015
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
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 previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.c. as per rules.
(Sheel Nagu) Judge sh/-