Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Kumar Upadhyay vs The State Of M.P. on 30 November, 2022
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 30th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55804 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
SUNIL KUMAR UPADHYAY S/O SHANKAR
PRASAD UPADHYAY, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ROJGAR SAHAYAK R/O VILLAGE
VICHARPUR P.S. AND TEHSIL KOTMA DISTRICT
ANUPPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI HEMANT SEN- ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. MAHILA
THANA DISTRICT SHAHDOL (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI J.S. PARIHAR - PANEL LAWYER )
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail, pending the trial.
The applicant is in custody since 17.11.2022 in connection with Crime No.73/2022 registered at P.S.-Mahila Thana, Shahdol, District-Shahdol (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC.
A s per the prosecution case, on 04.09.2022, 30 years old prosecutrix moved an application before Mahila Police Thana, Shahdol alleging that her marriage was fixed with the applicant in February, 2022. After settlement of Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA DUBEY Signing time: 12/1/2022 1:43:06 PM 2 marriage, they both were on talking terms. In March, applicant came to her house for playing Holi. Thereafter, he was repeatedly coming to her house. On 25.05.2022, at about 11:00 am, the applicant without giving any prior intimation came to her home and had a cup of tea with her and thereafter put a proposal for establishing physical relations. She said that it is not proper and they would establish physical relations after the marriage. At this, applicant told that the marriage has already been settled and committed rape with her and left for his home. Thereafter, he stopped talking with her and on the last day of July he told her that he does not like her and do not want to marry with her. FIR was registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is innocent. He has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated. As his marriage could not be solemnized with the prosecutrix with an intent to pressurize him and his family, a false and concocted story has been prepared almost after three months and 10 days of the alleged incident. No such incident has taken place. No reason has been assigned for the delayed FIR. Applicant is a Government employee. He is a resident of Shahdol District. Therefore, it has been prayed that applicant/accused be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant.
Admittedly, FIR has been lodged almost after a delay of 3 months that too after breakdown of the engagement between them. Therefore, having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the view that it is a case in which applicant/accused may be released on bail. Consequently, first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA DUBEY Signing time: 12/1/2022 1:43:06 PM 3 bail filed on behalf of applicant stands allowed.
I t is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular 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 applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him 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 his is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
and This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial. However, in case o f bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA DUBEY Signing time: 12/1/2022 1:43:06 PM 4 JUDGE VD Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA DUBEY Signing time: 12/1/2022 1:43:06 PM