Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Nidhi Thomas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 December, 2022

Author: Vishal Dhagat

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

                                                            1
                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                                             ON THE 15 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 57995 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    NIDHI THOMAS D/O NINAN THOMAS, AGED
                                 ABOUT   24   YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOB R/O
                                 MARAHAR DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH (M.P.) AT
                                 PRESIDENT OF NEURO SIDE STEM CELL
                                 HOSPITAL T.C. PALYA RAMA MOTI NAGAR
                                 BANGALORE. (KARNATAKA)

                           2.    APPU @ NAVYA SUSAN THOMAS D/O SHRI NINAN
                                 THOMAS (WRONGLY MENTIONED IN THE
                                 IMPUGNED ORDER AS D/O NINAM THOMAS),
                                 AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT
                                 R/O MARAHAR DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH AT
                                 PRESENT R/O 05 BHUWANIGIRI BANGALORE
                                 (KARNATAKA)

                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI MANISH DATT, SR. COUNSEL WITH MR.SIDDHARTH BENDEL,
                           ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                 POLICE STATION DAMOH DISTRICT DAMOH
                                 (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    VICTIM A D/O NOT MENTION NOT MENTION
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI PROMOD THAKRE )

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                             ORDER

1. This is first application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

2 . Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.749/2022, registered at Police Stationa-Damoh Dehat District-Damoh (M.P.) for offences punishable under Sections 354, 354(A), 342, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 7,8, 9(f), 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of SC & ST (POA) Act and Section 3, 5 of Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 & Section 3/8 of Madhya Pradesh Vishesh Kshetra Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2000.

3 . Learned Sr. counsel appearing for applicants submitted that No offence under Sections 354, 354(A), 342, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 7,8, 9(f), 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3(1)

(d), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of SC & ST (POA), Section 3(g) 7, 3, 5 of Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 & Section 3/8 of Madhya Pradesh Vishesh Kshetra Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2000 is made out against applicants. Only allegation, which is made against present applicants is that they threatened the complainant for demand of money. There is no allegation that applicants-Nidhi & Appu are said to have outraged the modesty of girls belonging to family of complainant, neither is there any allegation that applicant had converted said complainants into Christianity, nor is there any allegation that they had abused those persons with caste name. Only allegation is regarding demand of money. In these circumstances, it is prayed that applicants may be released on anticipatory bail.

4. Government Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for grant of anticipatory bail and it is submitted by him that applicants are Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETI TIWARI Signing time: 12/16/2022 10:49:41 AM 3 involved with other persons in an organized misuse of religion and converting Hindus into Christianity violating freedom to religion Act, 2021. It is submitted that investigation of the applicants is required to find their connections with other people, who are converting Schedule Castes and & Schedule Tribes community people into Christianity contrary to Act. In these circumstances, it is prayed that bail application may be dismissed.

5. Heard the counsel for the parties.

6. FIR and statement of one Rajesh was read over before this Court. On perusal of FIR as well as statement, only allegation, which is made against present applicants is regarding threatening the complainant for demand of money.

7. Considering aforesaid circumstances, application for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed.

8. It is ordered that in the event of arrest of applicants-Nidhi Thomas & Appu @ Navya Susan Thomas in connection with aforesaid crime number and the offence, on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority, applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail on condition that applicants will cooperate in investigation/trial of the case and will appear before Investigating Officer/trial Court, as and when required.

9 . Applicants will further abide by the conditions enumerated in sub- section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE nd Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETI TIWARI Signing time: 12/16/2022 10:49:41 AM