Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
G.S. Ahluwalia, J.
Kiledar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 10081 of 2022
Decided On : 02-03-2022
Bail - Criminal Offences - IPC 366, 376(d), 376(2)(h), 323, 506 - The court granted bail to the applicant based on the similarity of the case with a previously granted bail to a co-accused. The court considered the submissions of both parties and allowed the bail application without commenting on the merits of the case. The judgment referenced the Supreme Court case of Aparna Bhat and others Vs. State of M.P. in Criminal appeal No. 329/2021.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with Crime No.501/2021 registered for offences under Sections 366, 376(d), 376(2)(h), 323, and 506 of IPC. The court considered the similarity of the case with a previously granted bail to a co-accused and allowed the bail application without commenting on the merits of the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application without commenting on the merits of the case.
Issues: The main issue was the grant of bail to the applicant in connection with the criminal offences filed against them.
Ratio Decidendi: The court granted bail to the applicant based on the similarity of the case with a previously granted bail to a co-accused and without commenting on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The court directed the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court, with the order remaining effective till the end of trial but becoming ineffective in case of bail jump. The judgment also mandated the intimation regarding the grant of bail to be sent to the complainant.
JUDGMENT
G.S. ahluwalia, J. - This first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 09/02/2022 in connection with Crime No.501/2021 registered at Police Station Bamore, District Morena for offence under Sections 366, 376(d), 376(2)(h), 323 and 506 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that this Court by a detailed order dated 24/01/2022 passed in MCRC No.3781/2022 has granted bail to co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar and the case of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the Counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant. It is submitted that the reasons assigned by this Court for granting bail to co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar would also apply to the present applicant.
Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties.
This Court by order dated 24/01/2022 passed in MCRC No.3781/2022 has granted bail to co-accused Shriniwas Gurjar by observing as under:-
'It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution case, the prosecutrix who is aged about 20 years lodged a FIR that she was residing in her parental home along with her mother and is carrying a pregnancy of eight months. about three months back, at about 7 to 8 pm she was sitting in her rented room, and her mother was preparing food. at that time 14 to 15 persons came there including the applicant, her husband ajay Gurjar and father- in- law Sultan Gurjar and tried to drag her. When her mother and other persons intervened in the matter then they were assaulted and attempt was made to forcefully abduct her by putting her in the vehicle. When she was continuously resisting, then one person gave lathi blow on her head and thereafter she lost her consciousness and when she regained her consciousness, she found that she was completely without clothes and was lying on the floor of the car. The husband was sitting on the front seat of the car and the car was parked by the side of a canal. Thereafter, they took her to the house of one Sabha Ram Gurjar. She was kept in a forest area for 7 to 8 days and she was being guarded by various persons, including her husband ajay Gurjar and father in law Sultan Gurjar. It is alleged that applicant and other accused persons committed rape on her. Thereafter she was brought back to the house of Sabha Ram Gurjar from where they shifted her to the house of Ramlakhan. Thereafter she was taken to the house of Suresh and Bhabuti. again She was shifted to the house of Sabha Ram Gurjar. Whenever the police came in search of her, they used to remove her from the house. When her mother filed writ of habeaus corpus before the High Court, then she was produced by the police before the High Court and as she was under threat therefore, she did not disclose anything in the Court. It is submitted that infact the prosecutrix has lodged a false report. There appears to be some dispute between her and her husband and father- in-law which has been given colour of gang rape. When the prosecutrix was produced before the High Court, then not only she was in police protection but she was in the protection of the High Court and it is incorrect to say that she could not collect her courage to depose the above mentioned allegations. The applicant is in jail from 12.11.2021. Furthermore, prosecutrix was allegedly abducted 25.08.2021 whereas the FIR was lodged on 11.11.2021. Furthermore, the prosecutrix was handed -over to the custody of her mother on 22.10.2021, but again the prosecutrix took 20 days to lodge the report. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.'
Per contra, the application is opposed by the Counsel for the State. It is submitted by Shri Singh that since the prosecutrix was afraid of threatening extended by the accused persons, therefore, she could not
Grant of bail based on similarity of the case with a previously granted bail to a co-accused and without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the absence of evidence implicating the applicant, and the reference to the judgment of the Supreme Court rega....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evaluating the evidentiary value of the prosecutrix's statement for the purpose of granting bail, and the court's authority to ta....
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 age of the prosecutrix, her statements, and the delayed FIR were crucial factors in the Court's decision to grant bail to the applicant.
The court may grant bail based on the duration of custody and the expected trial duration, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The presumption of innocence is in favor of the accused till he is held guilty, and the evidence brought on record after the commencement of trial should be considered in bail applications.
The court emphasized a reformative approach for young offenders, balancing the seriousness of allegations with the potential for rehabilitation.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the material presented and overall consideration of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
