Madhya Pradesh High Court
Urmila Patro @ Poonam Patro vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 March, 2024
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 11 th OF MARCH, 2024
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CASE No. 1772 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
URMILA PATRO @ POONAM PATRO W/O SANATAN
PATRO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
TAMUNG P S RAJNAGAR DISTRICT SARAIKELA
(JHARKHAND)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI RISHIKESH BOHARE - ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
NAISARAI DISTRICT ASHOKNAGAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. PR OSECUTR IX THROUGH POLICE NAISARAI
DISTRICT ASHOKNAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE
RESPONDENT-STATE)
This application coming on for HEARING this day, the court passed
the following:
ORDER
This third bail application has been filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 231/2020 registered at Police Station Naisarai, District Ashoknagar (M.P.) for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 370(4) 420 and 120-B of the IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant is in Signature Not Verified judicial custody since 29/12/2020.
Signed by: PRACHI MISHRA Signing time: 12-Mar-24 10:30:32 AM 2First bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 05/07/2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 28813/2022. Second bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 27/12/2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.53107/2023. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that victim and other witnesses have been recorded before the Trial Court.
A s per the case of prosecution, victim, aged around 15 years left her parental home on 01/03/2020 due to ill treatment of her brother and mother. Accused Geeta Sahu met her near Ramnagar bridge and took her to house below the bridge where she met the applicant Poonam @ Urmila Patro. Geeta Sahu and Neha took her to Jamshedpur railway station. Poonam and her husband followed them on motorcycle. Geeta and Neha took her to Bilaspur where they met Ramesh Kushwah. Thereafter, Geeta Sahu, Neha and Ramesh Kushwah took her to Guna and married her to Devendra Kushwah. Devendra committed rape on her. Devendra informed her that Geeta, Neha, Santosh and Ramesh Kushwah had sold her for Rs. 95,000/-. She called her mother and police and informed them about the incident. On such allegations, PS Naisarai, District Ashoknagar (M.P.) registered FIR at Crime No. 231/2020 for offence punishable under Sections 363 and 370(4) ofthe IPC against Devendra Kushwah, Poonam Patro, Neha Patro and Geeta Sahu. Applicant was arrested on 29/12/2020, she is in custody ever since. Statements of victim were recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. Thereafter, prosecution for the offence punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(n), 420 and 120-B of the IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act was added. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted on 24/03/2021. The trial is underway.
Learned Counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI MISHRA Signing time: 12-Mar-24 10:30:32 AM 3 in the application, submits that applicant is falsely implicated merely for the reason that she is relative of main accused-Geeta Sahu. Learned counsel referring to statement of victim under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C, submits that only allegation against the applicant is that she followed Geeta and Neha Patro when they were taking victim to Jamshedpur railway station. Learned counsel further submits that no allegation is made against the applicant by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further referring to the statement of victim (P.W.1) recorded before the Trial Court, submits that no allegation is made against the applicant with regard to kidnapping or human trafficking by the applicant. Only allegation against the applicant is that victim stayed for one day in joint family home of the applicant. Learned counsel submits that mother of victim (P.W.2) also did not allege against the applicant. Brajesh Kushwah (P.W.3), Kishanlal (P.W.4), Ramkumar (P.W.6) and Sanjeev (P.W.7) did not support the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that in all 11 witnesses have been examined before the Trial Court. The Trial is pending for other formal witnesses. There is no likelihood of tampering with remaining evidence by the applicant. No criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant. Applicant has family to look after. There is no likelihood of her absconsion leaving her family and home. Trial would take time to conclude. Therefore, applicant may be extended the benefit of bail.
Per contra, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the arguments advanced by both the parties and overall circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI MISHRA Signing time: 12-Mar-24 10:30:32 AM 4 allowed.
Accordingly, it is directed that applicant URMILA PATRO @ POONAM PATRO s hall be released on bail in relation to Crime No. 231/2020 registered at Police Station Naisarai, District Ashoknagar (M.P.) for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 370(4) 420 and 120-B of the IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act , upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the following conditions, : (For the sake of convenience of understanding by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are also reproduced in Hindi as under):-
(1) Applicant shall remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the concerned court;
(1) vkosnd lacaf/kr U;k;ky; ds funZs'kkuqlkj lquokbZ dh izR;sd frfFk ij mifLFkr jgsxkA (2) Applicant shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar nature;
(2) vkosnd leku izd`fr dk dksbZ vijk/k ugha djsxk ;k mlesa lfEefyr ugha gksxkA (3) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them/him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer;
(3) vkosnd izdzj.k ds rF;ksa ls ifjfpr fdlh O;fDr dks izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls izyksHku] /kedh ;k opu ugha nsxk] ftlls ,slk O;fDr ,sls rF;ksa dks U;k;ky; ;k iqfyl vf/kdkjh dks izdV djus ls fuokfjr gksA (4) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to tamper with the Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI MISHRA Signing time: 12-Mar-24 10:30:32 AM 5 evidence or allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(4) vkosnd izR;{k ;k vizR;{k :i ls lk{; ds lkFk NsMNkM djus dk ;k lk{kh ;k lkf{k;ksa dks cgykus&Qqlykus] ncko Mkyus ;k /kedkus dk iz;kl ugha djsxkA (5) During trial, the applicant shall ensure due compliance of provisions of Section 309 of Cr.P.C. regarding examination of witnesses in attendance;
(5) fopkj.k ds nkSjku] mifLFkr xokgksa ls ijh{k.k ds laca/k esa vkosnd /kkjk 309 na-iz-la- ds izko/kkuksa dk mfpr vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djsxkA This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of breach of any of the precondition of bail, the Trial Court may consider on merit cancellation of bail without any impediment of this order.
The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the personal bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he had explained the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR) JUDGE Prachi Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRACHI MISHRA Signing time: 12-Mar-24 10:30:32 AM