Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arvind Pratap Singh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 March, 2017
MCRC-3138-2017
(ARVIND PRATAP SINGH RAJPUT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
06-03-2017
Mr. Sidharth Datt, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Arvind Singh, learned P.L. for the State.
This application has been filed U/s.439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant Arvind Pratap Singh Rajput, in connection with Crime No.239/16 of P.S. Amanganj, Distt. Panna for offences under Section 363, 366, 344, 376 and 120-B of I.P.C. and U/s.3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
According to the case of the prosecution, the prosecutrix who is 15 years old is stated to have been taken away from the lawful guardianship of her parents and raped by the applicant herein.
Learned counsel for the applicant has read out from the 164 statement of the prosecutrix in which she states that she had come to know of the applicant through another friend and that the applicant was wanting to marry the prosecutrix to which the prosecutrix has stated that he must talk to her parents. Thereafter, the date on which the incident is stated to have taken place, one Charan and Rajjan who are the acquaintance of the applicant are stated to have taken the prosecutrix on a motorcycle to Amanganj where the friend of the prosecutrix one Varsha is stated to have taken her hand and placed it in the hand of the applicant. From Amanganj the applicant is alleged to have taken the prosecutrix by bus to Katni and from there by train to Gurgaon where he kept the prosecutrix for 20 days and raped her against her will. The MLC of the prosecutrix does not reveal any external injury and the MLC is inconclusive of recent sexual intercourse or rape.
Looking at the facts and circumstances that has been disclosed from the 164 statement it prima facie appears that the prosecutrix consensually went with the applicant but however, the act of rape/sexual intercourse, as per the prosecutrix was done against her will. However, looking at the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the applicant and also that he has been in judicial custody since 5.11.2016 and that the charges have not yet been framed as so stated by learned counsel for the applicant, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant herein shall be enlarged on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE a