Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 July, 2021
Author: Shailendra Shukla
Bench: Shailendra Shukla
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 CRA No.3288/2021
CRA No.3288/2021
(Anas Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)
Indore, Dated : 12.7.2021
Heard through video conferencing.
Shri Gourav Verma, learned counsel for the
appellant.
Shri Sameer Verma, learned PL for the
respondent/State.
Heard. Perused the case diary.
Submissions were made on criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for grant of bail to appellant Anas S/o Shaikh Haider in respect of Crime No.358/2020 registered at Police Station - Palasiya, District Indore for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 376, 376(2)(n), 366- A, 120-B, 363, 366, 370(2), 370(4), 376(2)(k), 109 of IPC, under Section 3(1)(W)(1), 3(1)(W)(II), 3(2)(VA), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, under Section 75, 77 of Juvenile Justice Act and under Section 5, 6, 3, 4, 17 of POCSO Act. The applicant is in custody since 7.9.2020.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the charge sheet has since been filed. He has also drawn Court's attention to an order of the learned Single Judge at Jabalpur dated 8.3.2021 pronounced in Criminal Appeal No.6426/2020, in which under identical circumstances appeal has been allowed. He has sought bail submitting that the set of facts in Criminal Appeal No.6426/2020 were identical as in the present case.
Learned counsel for the State was heard, who submits that this Court had earlier in CRA No.1129/2021 Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN had heard the matter in respect of the appellant in TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2021.07.13 17:31:35 IST HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 CRA No.3288/2021 connected matter and after the arguments had been heard, learned counsel for the appellant had withdrawn the appeal on 31.3.2021. He further submits that the case against the appellant is in respect of incidents which occurred specifically at Indore while the order referred to by learned counsel for the appellant, is related to set of facts which had taken place at Bhopal. Learned counsel for the State further submits that in view of the fact that in respect of set of facts pertaining to incidents at Indore this Court has already considered the appeal of the appellant and the same has been withdrawn. Hence, as natural corollary, the present appeal also deserves to be dismissed.
Considered.
The accusation against the present appellant is that he being the driver of the main accused Pyare Miya used to escort minor girls from Bhopal to Indore and back on the instructions of the main accused Pyare Miya for the purpose of their sexual exploitation by Pyare Miya. There are number of such young girls. The appellant used to pick up these girls from their houses, would drop them to the flat of Pyare Miya at Vishnu High Tech City in Bhopal, where they were sexually exploited by Pyare Miya and before travelling to Indore the girls would be asked to get down from the car and the appellant would then go to the family residence of Pyare Miya situated at Shyamala Hills in Bhopal, where Pyare Miya would get into the car and the minor girls would again be picked up from the spot where they were asked to get down.
Case diary shows that co-accused Pyare Miya had purchased scanty clothes for these girls at Indore in the presence of the appellant. Thus, it appears that the Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2021.07.13 17:31:35 IST HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 CRA No.3288/2021 involvement of the appellant was not merely limited to driving the car but he also knew about all the wrongful acts and prima facie his involvement as co-conspirator is made out. This Court has earlier also considered the bail application of the appellant and after making submissions his application has been withdrawn in Criminal Appeal No.1129/2021.
After duly considering, no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the appellant. However, liberty is given to renew the prayer after framing of charges.
The appeal stands rejected.
C.C. as per rules.
(Shailendra Shukla) Judge trilok/-
Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2021.07.13 17:31:35 IST