Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravindra Pratap Singh Rajawat@Sonu ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 January, 2016
M.Cr.C. No. 11124 Of 2015
07.01.2016
Shri Girsih Desai, learned counsel for the applicant.
Ms. Mini Ravindran, learned GA for the respondent/State.
Heard.
This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 438/2015 registered under Section 354-A of the IPC and Sections 323, 294 & 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of the ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
It is alleged that applicant gave beating to the minor son of complainant by means of danda causing injuries on his left thigh and right hand. When the incident was narrated by injured to her mother, she asked from the applicant, then applicant abused her in the name of her caste.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence. He has falsely been implicated because the husband of the complainant has taken loan of Rs. 96,500/- from the father of the applicant. It is further submitted that a sale agreement was also executed in favour of the applicant by Shanti Bai and cash of Rs. 75,000/- was paid and not to return the money, this false complaint has been lodged after a delay of about 20 days. There is no likelihood of his absconsion, hence, prayed for anticipatory bail.
The prayer is opposed by learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State submitting that injured is minor and he has received injury.
Case-diary perused.
As per the medical report, two abrasions has been found. The nature of injury stated to have been simple in nature. The incident alleged to have been taken place on 24/08/15 and the report has been lodged on 16/09/15. It is stated that report was lodged after husband of complainant came back. However, the husband of the complainant has stated that he has gone to his in- laws house on 23/08/15 and came back after 5-6 days.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that there is no satisfactory explanation regarding the delay of about 20 days in lodging the FIR, but without commenting on merit, I allow this application and it is directed that in the event of arrest applicant, namely, Ravindra Pratapsingh be released on bail for the period of thirty days on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to abiding the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.
Applicant may apply for regular bail within a period of thirty days before the competent court.
C.c. as per rules.
(D.K.Paliwal) Judge sk