IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Sunita Yadav, J.
Prem Singh Bhadotiya – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 58808 of 2022
Decided On : 13-12-2022
Bail - Offence of Abduction and Rape - The court allowed the bail application of the accused, directing release on bail with certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant was arrested in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 365, 366-A, 368, 120-B, 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act. The allegation against the applicant was that he abducted the prosecutrix and committed rape upon her.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and sureties, subject to compliance with specified conditions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail in a case involving serious offences such as abduction and rape.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the arguments of the applicant's counsel regarding innocence and false implication, along with the fact that the prosecutrix had married the applicant and was living as his wife. The court also noted that further custodial interrogation was not required as the investigation was over and there was no likelihood of the applicant absconding.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail, subject to specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Sunita Yadav, J. - The applicant has filed this first application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
2. The applicant has been arrested on 21.09.2022 by Police Station Madhoganj, District Gwalior (M.P.) in Connection with Crime No.407 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC. Further added Sections 365, 366-A, 368, 120-B, 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act.
3. As per prosecution story, the allegation against the present applicant is that he abducted the prosecutrix and committed rape upon her.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further argued that the prosecutrix in her statements recorded u/Ss.161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. specifically mentioned that she left her parental home because she wanted to marry with present applicant/accused, however, her parents wanted to marry some other boy who lived in Mumbai. Further argument is that the prosecutrix got married with present applicant on 25/09/2022 and she was living as his wife. Allegedly, the prosecutrix travelled various places with present applicant/accused, however, there is no evidence that she ever resisted or raised alarm to save her. The applicant is in custody since 21/09/2022. Investigation in the matter is over by filing of charge-sheet, therefore, further custodial interrogation is no more required. The applicant i s permanent resident of Golnagar, Thana Morsaan, District Haathras (U.P.) Conclusion of trial is likely to take time and there is no likelihood of her absconsion, if released on bail. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.
6. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties [out of which one should be local surety since the applicant is resident of District Haathras, Uttar Pradesh] in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court.
8. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3 ) The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4) The applicant will not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.
5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6 ) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
8. Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.
9. E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court may grant bail based on factors such as lack of support from the victim, the age of the victim, and the likelihood of the trial taking time.
Grant of bail based on changed circumstances and parity with co-accused, without expressing opinion on merits of the case.
The court considered the consent of the prosecutrix and her father, the solemnization of marriage between the applicant and the prosecutrix, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the tria....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of lack of evidence, prolonged trial process, and the initial non-implication of the accused by the prosecutrix in granting bail ....
The court's decision was based on the provisions of Section 439 of Cr.P.C, considering the submissions and case diary, without reflecting on the merits of the case.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., which supported the applicant's innocence.
The solemnized marriage and cohabitation of the applicant and the prosecutrix were considered as grounds for granting bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.