The court considered the length of time the appellant had been in custody and the expected duration of the trial in granting bail.

JUDGMENT

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J. - Present second criminal appeal filed u/S.14(a)(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, 1989, assails the order dated 13/12/2021 passed by the Special Judge (atrocities), Shivpuri (M.P.); whereby, the application preferred by appellant herein u/S.439 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

Appellant has been arrested on 30/09/2021 in connection with offences punishable u/S. 376 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, 1989, registered as Crime No.128/2021 by Police Station Tendua, District Shivpuri (M.P.).

Learned counsel for the appellant- anil Dhakad has submitted that the appellant has not committed any offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. appellant is in custody since 30/09/2021, i.e. for more than four months. This is second appeal for grant of bail to the appellant. Earlier one was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter, now the statements of prosecutrix as well as her father has been recorded before the trial Court and they have not supported the prosecution case. The prosecutrix is major and she is residing in her parental house. No other material witness is remained to be examined. Trial will take its own time. The appellant is ready to abide by any condition which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and has submitted that the offence is registered against the appellant u/S. 376 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of atrocities) act, wherein prosecutrix is aged around 19 years. Hence, considering the nature and gravity of offence, learned State counsel prays for dismissal of this criminal appeal.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant along with fact that appellant is in custody since 30/09/2021 and trial will take its own time, without commenting on merits of the case, the appeal is allowed. It is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned.

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 co-operate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

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

4. The appellant shall not commit any kind of offence. In case of commission of any kind of offence, this bail order shall automatically stand canceled;

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

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of trial Court/ Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

This criminal appeal stands disposed of in above terms.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for information.

Certified copy as per rules.