Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ankit Meena vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 March, 2023

Author: Anil Verma

Bench: Anil Verma

                                                 1
               IN         THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                       AT INDORE
                                            BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                     ON THE 1 st OF MARCH, 2023
                                MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7353 of 2023

              BETWEEN:-
              ANKIT MEENA S/O SHRI SURESH MEENA, AGED ABOUT
              25 YEARS,
              OCCUPATION: PVT. JOB
              R/O H.NO. 145, KALANI BAGH, DEWAS
              DISTT. DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....APPLICANT
              (BY SHRI ONKAR SINGH SISODIYA - ADVOCATE)

              AND
              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
              THROUGH POLICE STATION PITHAMPUR, DISTRICT
              DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                         .....NON APPLICANT
              (BY MS. VARSHA THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                      This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
             following:

                      Heard on IA No.2974 of 2023, which is an application for taking
             documents on record.
                      Documents may be relevant for proper adjudication of this application,
             therefore, IA is allowed and the documents are taken on record.
                                                  ORDER

Applicant has filed this third bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is in jail since 11.7.2022 in connection Signature Not Verified with Crime No.383/2021 registered at P.S. - Pithampur, District Dhar (M.P.) for Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 02-Mar-23 10:25:05 AM commission of offence punishable under Section 363, 366-A, 376, 376(2)(n), 2 506 of IPC and Section 3/4, 5L/6 of POCSO Act.

As per the prosecution story, on 06/10/2022 at about 5 pm the minor prosecutrix left her house by informing her parents that she was going to market to laminate some document, but she did not come back. Parents of the prosecutrix searched her everywhere, but could not find her. During investigation, it has been gathered that present applicant abducted the prosecutrix and took her to Indore, Jaipur and Katra (J & K) and repeatedly committed rape upon her. Accordingly, the aforementioned offence was registered and he was arrested.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. He is in custody since 11.7.2022. There is no legal evidence available on record against the applicant. Investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed and charges has been framed and the case is fixed for the prosecution evidence, but final conclusion of trial will take long sufficient time. Applicant is permanent resident of District Dhar. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.

Per-contra, learned GA for respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that applicant's earlier bail application was rejected on merit vide order dated 23.11.2022 passed in MCRC No.52608/2022 after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and thereafter there is no material change in the circumstances, therefore, applicant does not deserve for bail.

Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below.

advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also the Signing time: 02-Mar-23 10:25:05 AM 3 fact that applicant's earlier bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 23.11.2022 after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the statement of the prosecutrix (PW-1), who has been examined before the trial Court and it was also held that as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others (CRA No.651/2007) decided on 30.7.2007, at the stage of consideration of bail this Court cannot go into the question of credibility and reliability of the witnesses put up by the prosecution.

After rejecting the earlier application, prosecution has examined 4 other witnesses but so many witnesses are yet to be examined. As per the statement of the teacher Dharmendra Singh (PW-3), date of birth of the prosecutrix is 30.9.2004 as per the scholar register Ex.P/9 and certificate Ex.P/11, therefore, at the time of incident prosecutrix was minor. There is no material change in the circumstances in which the applicant deserves for bail.

Hence, this repeated bail application is dismissed on merit. C.C. as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE trilok Signature Not Verified Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 02-Mar-23 10:25:05 AM