SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Raj) 541

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vinod Shanker Dave, J.
Bal Kishan - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Cri. Misc. Bail Application No. 1376 of 1985.
Decided On : 23-07-1985

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B.K. Pathak, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rizwan Alvi, P.P.

Anticipatory bail should not be granted to persons who are indulged in socially condemnable acts.

Headnote:

BAIL - SECTION 438 CR. PC - SECTION 376, 114 AND 498A INDIAN PENAL CODE - SUPPRESSION OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC ACT - ANTICIPATORY BAIL - CANCELLATION OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL - REJECTION OF BAIL APPLICATION - ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR CANCELLATION OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL.

Fact of the Case:

A woman, Mst. Chameli, filed a report alleging that her husband acts as a pimp and uses her for raising money by forcing her to engage in prostitution. She named several persons in her statement, including her husband, who were allegedly involved in the nefarious activities. An FIR was registered, and the husband applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr. PC.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the facts of the case were shocking and that the woman had been subjected to physical and mental torture by her husband and several other persons. The court held that the learned Sessions Judge had erred in granting anticipatory bail to the accused persons and that the provisions of anticipatory bail had been abused in this case.

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused persons in a case involving prostitution and sexual exploitation of a woman.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of anticipatory bail should not be used to aid persons who are indulged in socially condemnable acts. The court considered the facts of the case, including the woman's statement and the photographs of her with the accused persons, and found that the accused persons had no better picture than pointed out. The court also held that the learned Sessions Judge had not taken note of the salutory principles in which anticipatory bail has to be granted.

Final Decision: The court rejected the husband's application for anticipatory bail and simultaneously directed that a notice to show cause be issued to the other accused persons who had been granted anticipatory bail, as to why their bail should not be cancelled.

JUDGMENT

1. :- This bail application Under Section 438 Cr. PC presents a sad tale of Mst. Chameli who lodged a report on June 19, 1985, alleging that her husband acts as a pimp and uses her for raising money and for this she is forced to share bed with those who can afford to purchase her flesh. She alleged, he has used her for nefarious activities ever since her marriage with him. She has named a number of persons in her statement which was recorded by City Magistrate. Alwar on June, 19, 1985, on being forwarded by the Superintendent of Police, Alwar. The FIR was recorded on the basis of the aforesaid statement which she gave on oath before the Magistrate which reveals the startling facts, the entire narration of which is not important for the decision of this bail application. But suffice it to say that lamenting, she narrated the details as to how she has been subjected to surrender herself for satisfying the lust, whim and wishes of several persons who could purchase her flesh. She went on to complain that her husband used to earn money through her and whenever she objected to surrender herself she was given beating. When it reached the climax she went to the Superintendent of Police, Alwar and narrated her sorrowful story on which, as mentioned aforesaid, her statements were recorded and the FIR taken down. A case was registered at police station Kotwali, Alwar for offence Under Section 376, 114 and 498A Indian Penal Code.

2. In aforesaid report 8 persons have been named out of which 7 have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Alwar, vide, order, dated July I, 1985, and two vide order, dated July 3, 1985. The learned Judge however rejected the bail of her husband who has moved the present application and this is how the matter has been brought to the notice of this Court.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case has been falsely foisted against his client because of one Suresh Punjabi who is in liason with his wife Mst. Chameli and in fact it is he who is, using her for earning money by black-mailing. It is alleged that Suresh Punjabi has taken certain nude photographs of his wife Chameli with 7 accused persons named in the report viz Sarva Shri M.L. Garg, Sardar Channi, V.K. Sharma, Harish Modi, Babu Lal Agarwal and Yogesh Mahavar and showed the same to him and threatened that in case he will raise his voice he will be killed. Thus it is submitted that the petitioner is, on the contrary, being tortured mentally and threatened physically as well. It is further submitted that according to her she been subjected to rape for last four years but she has never complained and this silence on her part shows that she was a willing party and the whole story has been subsequently made out. It is further submitted that a mere perusal of the FIR shows that the whole story is hollow and fake. It is further argued that since as many as 7 persons who had been named in the FIR and who had used Mst. Chameli for satisfying their lust for female flesh, have been -granted bail and his case falls on a better footing.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that this is one of the serious cases where even the persons who have been granted anticipatory bail, ought not to have been granted the same and made an oral prayer that notice be issued to those 7 persons as to why their bail should not be cancelled under the provisions of Section 439(2) Criminal Procedure Code.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have given my earnest consideration to the facts of the case. I have also perused the orders and statement of prosecutrix.

6. The facts of this case are shocking. A bare perusal of the FIR discloses that how a lady of tender age is subjected to physical assaults on her body by several persons as her husband wanted to raise money. She has been made to move from pillar to post and has been sexually enjoyed by various prominent and monied p










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top