Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sunil @ Sonu Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 August, 2018

                                 1                               CRA-5317-2018
       The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  CRA-5317-2018
            (SUNIL @ SONU PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


Jabalpur, Dated : 08-08-2018
      Shri D.K. Shah, Advocate for the appellant.
      Shri V.S. Mishra, Dy. Govt. Adv. for the respondent no.1/State.

None present from the respondent No.2/complainant despite compliance of provision of Section 15(A)(III) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by the respondent No.1.

Case diary perused and arguments heard.

This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (1) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 1/6/2018 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Raisen, in the bail application; whereby learned Special Judge rejected the bail application filed by the appellant, under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to get bail in Crime No.208/2018 registered at P.S. Bareli, Distt. Raisen (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(N) of IPC and also Section 3(2)(5) of ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 5/6 of the POSCO Act.

As per prosecution case, on 28/4/2018 appellant abducted the prosecutrix, who was minor at the time of incident, and took her to Mandideep then Bawadiyakala where he kept her and committed sexual intercourse with her. On that, police registered Crime no.208/2018 registered at P.S. Bareli, Distt. Raisen (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(N) of IPC and also Section 3(2)(5) of ST/SC (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 5/6 of the POSCO Act and investigated the matter. During investigation on 18/5/2018 police arrested the appellant. On that, the appellant filed an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for releasing him on bail, which was rejected by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act vide order dated 1/6/2018. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, appellant filed this Criminal Appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant has falsely been implicated in this matter. Prosecutrix was major at the time of incident and went with the appellant on her own will. Prosecutrix also admitted this fact in her statement recroded by JMFC under Section 164 of the CrPC. Charge-sheet has been filed and the appellant is in custody since 18/5/2018 and conclusion of trial will take considerable time. So 2 CRA-5317-2018 appellant be released on bail.

On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that the appellant abducted the minor girl and made sexual relation with her, so he should not be released on bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as to the fact that the appellant is in custody since 18/5/2018 and the charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, so without commenting on merit, the appeal is allowed. It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant :-

1.The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The appellant will cooperate in the trial;

3.The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.

C.C. as per rules.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE m/-