Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ganapat Rao Dherangye vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 October, 2020
Author: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
Bench: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
:1:
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C.No 31829/2020
(Ganpat Rao Dherangye Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore, Dated: 14/10/2020
Shri Shivendra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Heard. Case diary perused.
This is 1st application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 351/2020 registered at Police Station- Kotwali District- Dewas for commission of the offence punishable under Section 354 (A) (1) (I), 354 (A) (1) (ii), 323, 294, 506, 190 of I.P.C. & Section 9L, 9N 10 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012.
As per prosecution story, an FIR has been lodged against the applicant alleging that he tried to outrage the modesty of his own daughter. On the basis of that the aforesaid, offence has been registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is an ex-policemen who unfortunately had to do some small time service for the bread and butter. He is not having any criminal record. It is also submitted that the wife of the present applicant over some trifling altercation has incriminated him for an offence which no father can do with his daughter. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 13.06.2020. Investigation is over, charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent / State has opposed the application by contending that the minor daughter of the applicant aged about 14 years 5 months at the time of incident had :2: made allegation against the applicant that he used to wake-up the victim and forcibly show adult videos to her and used to touch her private parts with filthy intention, when she used to protest, the applicant used to threaten her to kill and this fact has also found support from the statement of elder brother and sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the applicant, therefore, it cannot be said that due to family dispute the wife of the applicant had made false allegation against him. Hence, he prays of the rejection of bail application.
After considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the age of the prosecutrix as well as allegation made against applicant, this court is of the view that no case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.
(S. K. Awasthi) Judge praveen PRAVEEN Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR NAYAK DN: c=IN, o=DISTRICT AND SESSION COURT INDOR, postalCode=452005, KUMAR st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=e98f729464903facdd39c45 4715d6eccc5a350c9111fb019b34da NAYAK ce6d05b8fd5, cn=PRAVEEN KUMAR NAYAK Date: 2020.10.15 11:54:19 +05'30'