Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hariom Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 July, 2024
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1 MCRC-25448-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 12 th OF JULY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 25448 of 2024
HARIOM PATEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Uma Shankar Tiwari - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Promod Thakre - Public Prosecutor for State.
Shri Chitransh Shrivastava - Advocate for objector.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.275 of 2023 registered at Police Station Adegaon, District Seoni (M.P.) for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 & 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012.
2. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and he has not committed any offence in any manner. It is submitted that the applicant and victim were known to each other. The victim herself left the house without any pressure of the applicant. They have solemnized the marriage on 23.02.2024 at Shiv Sharda Mandir, Jabalpur and thereafter got it registered at Marriage Bureau. The document to the aforesaid effect has been filed along with the application. He is in custody since 06.04.2024 and as a charge-sheet has been filed, he prays for grant of bail.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the application stating therein that the victim was minor aged about 17 years and 6 Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/16/2024 6:38:10 PM 2 MCRC-25448-2024 months at the time of commission of offence. She has supported the prosecution story in her statement. The record indicates that the applicant was already married and he had made physical relations with a minor and subsequently has also solemnized the marriage. There is a recovery of articles from the possession of the present applicant. Under these circumstances, no case for grant of bail is made out. He prays for dismissal of the application.
4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this court is not inclined to allow the bail application. Accordingly, the application is hereby rejected.
5. This Court vide order dated 05.07.2024 had directed for filing of an affidavit by the concerning SHO to the effect that despite complaints being made by the parents of the victim, as to why action has not been taken by the authorities. An affidavit has been filed explaining the circumstances. In para 6, the SHO has stated as under:
"6. That, the deponent/investigating officer most respectfully submits that she had joined in Police Service in the year 2016 and since then no departmental inquiry is initiated against her and nor major penalty/punishment given to her for investigation. This mistake has taken first time and she has given only penalty of censure in election period in the year 2024. Copy of the order dated 05.04.2024 is annexed herewith as Annexure A/1."
6. The records indicate that initially the offence got registered for the offences punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and thereafter a final report has been filed for the following offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 376(2)(N) and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012. Despite knowing well that the applicant was already married and during lifetime of his first spouse, he has taken away a minor victim from the lawful custody of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/16/2024 6:38:10 PM 3 MCRC-25448-2024 her parents, made physical relations with her and also has solemnized the marriage. The marriage certificate is affixed along with this application.
7. The case diary does not indicate that any investigation was carried out by the police authorities regarding second marriage performed by the applicant during lifetime of his first wife. Not only, this they have also got the marriage registered at Marriage Bureau. The procedure for registration of marriage at Marriage Bureau is a detailed procedure and contained submissions of affidavits by either of the parties. It appears that the applicant has filed a false declaration before the Marriage Bureau Officer. He has not disclosed the factum of he being a married person and has not divorced his first wife and she is still alive. However, the aforesaid fact was brought to the notice of the Investigating Officer by the parents of the victim, but no investigation is being carried out.
8. When this court had asked to explain the same, an affidavit has been submitted by the SHO in a casual manner. There is virtually no explanation for the aforesaid, except the fact that a mistake has been committed and this is her first mistake. The aforesaid explanation cannot be accepted. Under these circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the Superintendent of Police ought to have been directed to conduct an enquiry against working of the concerning SHO. Therefore, the Superintendent of Police, District Seoni is directed to conduct an enquiry with respect to working of the Investigating Officer/SHO of Police Station Adegaon, District Seoni with respect to Crime No.275 of 2023.
9. Let an enquiry be completed within a period of 30 days and a report be submitted be submitted before the court for perusal.
10. A copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Seoni for necessary compliance.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/16/2024 6:38:10 PM4 MCRC-25448-2024 (VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/16/2024 6:38:10 PM