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

2022 Supreme(MP) 1092

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vishal Dhagat, J.
Rahul Ukey – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 59869 of 2022
Decided On : 19-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
S.K. Soni, Advocate, Ajeet Rawat, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail application - Applicant arrested for offences under Sections 376(2)(n) and 450 of IPC - Arguments presented by both sides regarding innocence, cooperation in trial, and the prosecutrix's consent - Court allows bail considering applicant's incarceration and the prosecutrix's status as a major. (Paras 2, 3, 6)

(B) Bail - Conditions - The applicant shall attend court as per bond conditions, shall not commit similar offences, and shall not influence witnesses. (Paras 7)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested on 05-12-2022 for alleged offences. The prosecutrix, being a major, claimed to have lived with the applicant for about 8 months before filing the report based on the applicant's failure to marry her.

Findings of Court:
Considering the circumstances, the court allowed bail to the applicant on specific conditions.

Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail based on the circumstances surrounding the allegations and the status of the prosecutrix.

Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted the applicant's prolonged detention, the major status of the prosecutrix, and the nature of the allegations when deciding to grant bail.

Result: Bail application allowed with conditions.

JUDGMENT

Vishal Dhagat, J. - This is first application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail to the applicants.

2. Applicant has been arrested on 05.12.2022 in connection with Crime No.56/2022 for offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 450 of the IPC registered at Police Station-Mahila Police Station Balaghat, District-Balaghat (M.P.).

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. Applicant is in jail since 05.12.2022. Prosecutrix is major and there was no false promise to marry her by the applicant. Prosecutrix was consenting party. It is further submitted by him that applicant will cooperate in trial and will not influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case. On these grounds, he prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for grant of bail. It is submitted that investigation is incomplete and charge sheet is yet to be filed. Applicant gave false promise of marry to proseuctrix and thereafter, violated her. On said ground, he prays for dismissal of bail application.

5. Heard the counsel for the parties.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that applicant is in jail since 05.12.2022, prosecutrix is major and also the fact that prosecutrix lived with the applicant for long time about 8 months and thereafter she had lodged report as applicant did not marry her, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, bail application filed by the applicant is allowed. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his regular appearance before Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of trial.

7. The applicant shall abide by the following conditions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C. as under:-

    (a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter;

    (b) that such person shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected and;

    (c) that such person shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

8. C.C. as per rules.

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