Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neeraj Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 June, 2020
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
1 MCRC-18480-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-18480-2020
(NEERAJ SAHU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
MCRC/18480/2020
Jabalpur, Dated : 29-06-2020
Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for applicant Rajesh Singh
Baghel on behalf of M.Cr.C. No.16064/2020.
Shri S.B. Shrivastava, learned counsel for applicant Neeraj Sahu on
behalf of M.Cr.C. No.18480/2020.
Shri A. Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
Shri B.R. Vijaywar, learned counsel complainant. These are the first bail applications filed by applicants under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.644/2020 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Seoni (M.P.) for commission of offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(2) (i) and 376(d) of I.P.C. and Section 3, 4 and 5L of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Counsel appearing for applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. Actual behavior of prosecutrix was not good in school and, therefore, a complaint was made against her. After some time, she left the school and due to said reason, she had made a false complaint against the applicants.
A s per prosecution story, between 15.08.2015 to March, 2020 prosecutrix is said to have been raped by the applicant. Prosecutrix is a teenage girl who had joined the school where the applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel was a Teacher. Rajesh Singh Baghel is said to duped the prosecutrix with some drugs in tea. She fainted and thereafter she was raped. It is also alleged that videography of the act of rape was done by applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel. Showing the said videography, prosecutrix was blackmailed and she was repeatedly raped.
As per prosecution story, another person namely applicant Neeraj Sahu Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Date: 30/06/2020 17:54:23 2 MCRC-18480-2020 who is Director of Sunrise School also raped her twice. Prosecutrix has given a written complaint and had also made statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. against applicant Neeraj Sahu as well as applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel.
Counsel for applicant submitted that the prosecutrix date of birth is 02.11.1998 and she is only 16 years of age. She had passed only class 12th and with her educational qualification, it is not possible that she will get a teaching job in a school. In fact, she was employed in school in year 2017 and false complaint is made against applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel.
Counsel for applicant has filed the mark-sheet and other documents and also attendance register of school to show that her presence is marked only in the year 2017. F.I.R. has been registered after delay of about 5 years. Prosecution version is false and cannot be accepted at its face value. On basis of such arguments of counsel for applicant Rajesh Singh Baghel prayed for grant of bail.
Counsel appearing for applicant Neeraj Sahu also stated that false allegations were made against him. He is innocent. He is Director of Sunrise School, therefore, he has falsely been implicated in the case.
Considered the arguments of counsel for applicants as well as counsel appearing for State.
Prosecutrix has named Rajesh Singh Baghel as well as Neeraj Sahu as the person who had raped her. She was raped between 15.08.2015 to March, 2020. She was blackmailed by showing videography. Seeing the tender age of prosecutrix, delay cannot be a ground for grant of bail to the applicants.
As far as, the arguments that prosecutrix was only Class-12th passed and she could not get a job in school with her qualifications is only based on assumption. Prosecutrix was also doing computer work in the school and a Class-12th passed student with computer knowledge can do the work. She was also studying part-time, therefore, prosecutrix was only class-12th passed in year 2015 and do not hold qualification to get a job of teacher, do Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Date: 30/06/2020 17:54:23 3 MCRC-18480-2020 not belief prosecution story.
It is also argued by the counsel appearing for the applicants that no video-clips has been seized on basis of which prosecutrix was blackmailed and raped which makes prosecution story false and therefore, applicants may be released on bail. Incident has occurred between a long period of time i.e. between year 2015 to year 2020 and in such a long period, if video-clips were not seized by the police, will not dent or make prosecution story improbable.
Looking to the gravity of offence committed by the applicants, bail applications filed by Rajesh Singh Baghel and Neeraj Sahu are rejected.
(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE sp/-
Digitally signed by SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Date: 30/06/2020 17:54:23