Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dipanshu @ Dipanshul Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 May, 2019
1 MCRC-19456-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-19456-2019
(DIPANSHU @ DIPANSHUL YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 17-05-2019
Shri Vivek Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Mohd. Siddiqui, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard.
Case diary perused.
This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant in connection with Crime No.63/2019 registered by P.S. Jiyavan, District Singrauli (MP) for offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 376(2)(n)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per the case of the prosecution, on 141/2/2018 at about 7.00 pm, prosecutrix aged about 19 years was kidnapped by the co-accused Vinod Yadav from her residential house situated at village Jaghat under the jurisdiction of police station Jiyavan District Singrauli. He had taken her to Sidhi on motorcycle from there to Lillore (A.P.), kept her in captivity and committed forceful intercourse with her. Later on, she had been taken to Rakhoti (Gujrat) and also kept her in a rented room for a period of four months and committed forceful intercourse. It is also alleged that on 14/02/2019 applicant has left the prosecutrix at Bus Stand, Sidhi and fled from there. Prosecutrix reached at her home and narrated the incidence to her family members, on that basis, missing report which was already registered has been converted into FIR registered under Crime No.63/2019 for the offence under Sections 366, 376, 376(2)(n)/34 of the IPC. Medical Examination of the prosecutrix was conducted and statements under Section 161 & 164 have been recorded. During the course of statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., prosecutrix has narrated that the applicant Dipanshu @ Depanshul Yadav was also there when she was first kidnapped from her residential house at village Jaghat and he helped the co-accused in abducting her. On that basis, applicant's name is arrayed in the list of accused person.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 17/05/2019 04:39:19 2 MCRC-19456-2019 committed any crime and has falsely been implicated in the case. He is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the application and there is no possibility to his for absconding and tampering with the prosecution witness. He further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26/03/2019. In view of the aforesaid, it has been prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the Stated opposes the prayer of the applicant and prays for dismissal of the application.
From perusal of the case diary it seems that applicant's name is not in the FIR. Whatever contribution is shown to the crime is only that he had helped the co-accused Vinod Yadav for abduction of the prosecutrix who is already major. Applicant is in judicial custody since 26/03/2019.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the facts as pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 26/03/2019, in the opinion of this Court, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. Consequently, this application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of applicant is allowed.
It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that Court on all dates fixed in the case and for complying with the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MOHD. FAHIM ANWAR) JUDGE manju Digitally signed by MANJU CHOUKSEY Date: 17/05/2019 04:39:19