Yuvraj @ Pappi Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 January, 2015

[Cites 4, Cited by 12]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Yuvraj @ Pappi Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 January, 2015

        <font size="4">
    <div style="width: 600px; background-color: white;  height: 500px; margin: 0px auto; word-wrap: break-word;" id="ggg" onkeypress="return  nb(event)" onmouseup="checkStat()" contenteditable="true"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <w:WordDocument>
  <w:View>Normal</w:View>
  <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
  <w:TrackMoves/>
  <w:TrackFormatting/>
  <w:PunctuationKerning/>
  <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
  <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
  <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
  <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
  <w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
  <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
  <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
  <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
  <w:Compatibility>
   <w:BreakWrappedTables/>
   <w:SnapToGridInCell/>
   <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
   <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
   <w:DontGrowAutofit/>
   <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
   <w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp/>
   <w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/>
   <w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
   <w:Word11KerningPairs/>
   <w:CachedColBalance/>
  </w:Compatibility>
  <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
  <m:mathPr>
   <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
   <m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
   <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
   <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
   <m:dispDef/>
   <m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
   <m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
   <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
   <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
   <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
   <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
  </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:.4in;text-align:center;
mso-line-height-alt:5.0pt;page-break-before:always" align="center"><b><u><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:&quot;Georgia&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;">M.Cr.C. No.20559/2014</span></u></b></p>

<p style="margin-top:0in;line-height:150%"><b><u><span style="font-size:13.0pt;
line-height:150%;font-family:&quot;Georgia&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;">14.01.2015</span></u></b></p>

<p style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:5.05pt;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:
0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:150%"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;
line-height:150%;font-family:&quot;Georgia&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;"><span style="mso-tab-count:
1">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Shri Sankalp Kochar, Advocate for the applicant.<span style="mso-tab-count:1">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></p>

<p style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:5.05pt;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:
0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:150%"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;
line-height:150%;font-family:&quot;Georgia&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;"><span style="mso-tab-count:
1">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Shri C.K.Mishra, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.</span></p>

<p style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:5.05pt;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:

0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:150%"><span style="mso-tab-count:

1">            Heard.             This is second bail application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant Yuvraj @ Pappi Lodhi for offences under Sections 376(2)(f), 511 of the I.P.C. and section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, in connection with Crime No.647/2014 registered at Police Station Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur, M.P. after rejection of first bail application on merits vide order dated 16.10.2014 in M.Cr.C.No.14410/2014.             Counsel for the applicant contends that after rejection of first bail application, the statements of the prosecutrix as well as grandmother have been recorded and looking to their testimony it appears to be a case of dispute on account of the Fixed Deposit which was made in the name of the child as well as grandmother.  Learned counsel contends that looking to the testimony of both these witnesses it appears to be a false case registered against the applicant; therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prays that the bail application may be rejected.             After hearing learned counsel for the parties, on due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the allegations, the reappraisal of the evidence recorded in the court is not warranted at this stage.  Therefore, no case for grant of bail is made out.  Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected.                         (J.K.Maheshwari)                JUDGE <!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";

mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;

mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;

mso-style-noshow:yes;

mso-style-priority:99;

mso-style-qformat:yes;

mso-style-parent:"";

mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;

mso-para-margin:0in;

mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;

mso-pagination:widow-orphan;

font-size:11.0pt;

font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";

mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;

mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;

mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";

mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;

mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;

mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;

mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";

mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} </style> <![endif]-->  <object type="application/pdf" id="ggg_object" style="display: none"></object>  </div>

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Yuvraj @ Pappi Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 January, 2015