Madhya Pradesh High Court
Netrapal Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 February, 2017
CRA-3657-2016
(NETRAPAL SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
20-02-2017
Shri I.S.Yadav, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Amit Pandey, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard. Case diary perused.
This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 24.11.2016 passed by the Special Judge, Anuppur, whereby the court below has dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The appellant is in custody since 28/09/2016 for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 370, 376/34 of the IPC, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act and section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act vide Crime No.157/2016 registered at Police Station Amarkantak, District Anuppur (M.P.).
According to the prosecution story, the allegation against the appellant is that he was involved in selling the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the appellant/accused submitted that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant/accused is in custody since 28.09.2016. There is no specific role of the appellant in the alleged incident. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time to conclude. Other co-accused Mukesh Chandra has already been released on bail by this court and his case is similar with that of Mukesh. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, prayer is made to enlarge the applicant/accused on bail on the ground of parity.
Learned P.L. for the respondent/State has opposed the bail and prayed for rejection for the same.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of impugned order, this Court is of the view that case of present appellant is similar with that of co-accused Mukesh. Therefore, on the ground of parity, impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed. It is ordered that the appellant/accused Netrapal Singh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (3) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C.
CC as per rules.
(J. P. GUPTA) JUDGE HS