Madhya Pradesh High Court
Umrav Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 April, 2023
Author: Subodh Abhyankar
Bench: Subodh Abhyankar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR
ON THE 5th OF APRIL, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5303 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
UMRAV SINGH S/O SOHAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT
48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
1.
GRAM GHATTIYA, DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
SUMER SINGH S/O BAHADUR SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PANCHAYAT
2. SECRETARY GRAM GHATTIYA MOHALLA,
RAJASVA COLONY, WARD NO. 15, DISTRICT
UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI VIRENDRA SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
1. HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
RAGHVI, DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
PROSECUTRIX X THROUGH P.S. RAGHVI
2.
DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SHALABH SHARMA, G.A./P.L. FOR THE STATE AND SHRI ADITYA
JAIN, ADVOCATE FOR THE OBJECTOR)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed
the following:
ORDER
1] They are heard. Perused the documents / challan papers. 2] This is applicants' first application under Section 438 of Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 2 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.07/2023 registered at Police Station Raghvi, District Ujjain (MP) for offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(d) & 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3] Allegation against the applicants is of gang rape. The facts of the case are that according to the FIR, which was lodged on 12/01/2023, at around 00.10 hours in respect of the incident which took place on 10/01/2023, at around 6:30 pm and the prosecutrix approached the police station at 9 O'clock the night of 11/01/2023. It is alleged that the applicant No.2 Sumer Singh who was an old acquaintance of the prosecutrix, called her at Suhagpur Fanta where he raped her in the vehicle and thereafter the applicant No.1 Umrav Singh also took turn on her. The prosecutrix did not lodge the FIR immediately, however, after gathering courage, she approached the police station on the next day i.e., on 11/01/2023, and lodged the report.
4] Counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant No.2 Sumer Singh happens to be a Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat Ghatiya, District Ujjain, whereas applicant No.1 is his friend and an agriculturist and both of them have been falsely implicated in the case which is also apparent from the transcript dated 10/01/2023, which has also been filed by the applicant no.1 Umrao Singh in which, the conversation took place between the prosecutrix with applicant Umrao Singh is recorded, in which the prosecutrix herself has called the applicant to their meeting place and Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 3 after the applicants reached on the spot, the prosecutrix and the other persons forced them to sign certain documents on 10/01/2023 on the threat of lodging a false report of commission of rape, and immediately on the next day, i.e. 11/01/2023, the applicant no.1 also lodged a detailed report to the S.P. Ujjain that they are being blackmailed by the prosecutrix and other persons to the tune of Rs.35 Lakhs. Counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to the transcript of the telephonic conversation which took place between Sumer Singh and Shyam Singh. Counsel has also submitted that he has also submitted a video clip where the applicants have been forced to sign the documents in a dark room wherein the presence of Shyamsingh is also apparent. It is also submitted that the applicants are also ready to get themselves examined and give their samples for FSL and DNA report, hence their custodial interrogation in the circumstances is not necessary. Thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicants be released on anticipatory bail.
5] Counsel appearing for the objector, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for anticipatory bail is made out as it is a case of gang rape. It is also submitted that after the interim bail was granted by this Court to the applicants, applicant No.1 Umrao Singh also called the prosecutrix and by representing himself as the S.P.,forced her to withdraw the complaint. Copy of the transcript is also filed on record. It is also submitted that the dispute of Shyamsingh with the applicant was regarding a plot only which has also come on record in the aforesaid conversation.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 46] Counsel for the respondent / State has also opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 7] Heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as also the documents filed on record.
8] On perusal of the documents filed on record and after going through the audio clips submitted by the applicants to the police which are also available with the case diary, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is certainly an incident has taken place in which the prosecutrix and the applicants were involved, however, it cannot be said with certainty as to what transpired that day and if the prosecutrix was a consenting party. The audio clips also reveal that there was certainly a conversation going on between the parties to settle the matter for an amount to the tune of Rs.35 Lakhs which the applicants wanted to reduce from 20 or 15 Lakhs. The contention of the counsel for the objector that the conversation was in relation to a plot only, but a video clip of the applicants and the other persons which is placed on record reveals that in the mobile lights something is being scribbled on a piece of paper and the manner in which one of the applicants is writing the document clearly indicates that he is being forced to write the same. Apart from that, the audio clips are also incriminating and clearly indicates involvement of other persons also who are trying to extort money from the applicants. 9] It is also found that this Court had granted interim relief to the applicants on 08/02/2023, and subsequently on 01/03/2023, this Court had also directed the Investigating Officer to remain present in the Court and the counsel for the State was directed to obtain the Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 5 documents from the applicants and inquire what action has been taken in the matter by the police but no satifactory answer has been given by the said I.O. In the case diary, this Court also finds that the sealed envelops in which the pen-drive containing the audio clips has been kept, have not even been opened in the A.G. office. Learned counsel for the State has also not cared to go through them to make out any sense out of the conversation taking place between the parties, despite the fact that on many earlier occasions, this Court has directed the counsel appearing for the State to argue the matter after going through the audio or video clip, if available on record relating to the incident.
10] The prosecutrix has also placed on record a transcript of some audio clip but the same also reveals that the conversation is rather dubious. The audio clip, in which the applicant has tried to call the prosecutrix by impersonating as SP also reveals that something suspicious was going on and the conversation does not appear to be confined to some property. Although this Court deprecates the conduct of the applicant Umrao Singh in calling the prosecutrix imposing as S.P. police, but still is of the considered opinion that this matter needs deeper and thorough investigation by the police to nab the real culprits.
11] This Court is also of the opinion that if the applicants have committed the offence, they should not be sparred in any manner but the documents filed by the applicants on record including the audio and video clips, do reveal that they are being subjected to extortion and in such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 6 custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary and they deserve to be released on anticipatory bail.
12] Accordingly, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants shall be released on bail, upon their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) each and furnishing one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer). The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. They shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 13] It is also directed that after obtaining the FSL and DNA report of the applicants and the prosecutrix, if it is found that the said reports are positive, and connect the applicant/s with the offence, his/their bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference to this Court and he/they shall surrender before the Trial Court immediately.
14] It is also directed that the Inspector General of Police (I.G.), Ujjain to take over the investigation from the present Investigating Officer of the concerned police station and be handed over to some senior police officer. The I.G., Ujjain shall also personally supervise the progress of the investigation and bring the same to some logical conclusion. If it is found that the applicants were subjected to blackmail by the other persons, appropriate legal action shall be taken against such other persons also who are involved in this case,. The I.G., Ujjain is also directed to submit a short report regarding Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58 7 conclusion of the investigation in the present case and apprise this Court of the outcome of the order which is being passed today in this case.
15] The office of the Advocate General is also directed to henceforth argue the matter after perusing the entire case diary including the audio/video clips which are available in the case diary, on which any of the parties rely upon.
16] Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned I.G., Ujjain for necessary action and compliance.
17] Accordingly, Miscellaneous Criminal Case is allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE krjoshi Signature Not Verified Signed by: KHEMRAJ JOSHI Signing time: 06-04-2023 16:33:58