Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok Dhanak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 April, 2022
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 4th OF APRIL, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12230 of 2022
Between:-
ASHOK DHANAK S/O SHRI SANJAY DHANAK ,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
VILLAGE GADARWAS P.S BHARKACHHKALA
TEHSIL BADI DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI NAVEEN GIRI GOSWAMI, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION BHARKACHHKALA RAISEN
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PRAMOD SAXENA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This first bail application has come up for hearing on admission on this
day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant- Ashok Dhanak S/o Shri Sanjay Dhanak aged about 21 years, who is in custody since 24/12/2021 in connection with Crime No.103/2021 registered at Police Station Bharkachhkala, District Raisen (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent. Prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has admitted that she had given her consent for marriage after consuming some Bhabhuti as was given by the present applicant to the complainant. She had called the present applicant and thereafter on 20.12.2021 at about Signature Not SAN Verified 2:00 AM, she had left her home along with Ashok. She travelled up to Digitally signed by APARNA TIWARI Bharkachhkala and then from Bharkachhkala to Raisen, Raisen to Date: 2022.04.06 17:14:21 IST 2 Barbatpur. It is submitted that since her age was less, therefore, marriage could not be performed and she was intercepted by the Police personnel. It is submitted that its a case of consent, applicant is in jail since 24.12.2021. Trial will take time for its conclusion. Hence, prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Learned Government Advocate for the non-applicant/State opposes the bail application and submits that as per the 164 statement of the prosecutrix, it is evident that applicant had given her some Bhabhuti. Applicant has confessed that applicant had established physical relationship with the prosecutrix. DNA report is positive. Dr. Sujata Gautam Scientific Officer and Assistant Chemical Examiner, FSL Laboratory, Bhopal has clearly mentioned that Y-DNA profile obtained from the vaginal slide of the prosecutrix matches with the Y-DNA profile obtained from blood sample of the present accused. At the time of the incident, prosecutrix was less than 18 years of age. Since prosecutrix has yet not been examined before the trial Court, therefore, when prosecutrix is examined and her statements are recorded before the trial Court, which will not be appropriate to extend benefit of bail to the present applicant as that may have a negative effect on the prosecutrix.
Therefore, for the present application is dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE AT