Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J.
Ajay Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 14626 of 2023
Decided On : 10-04-2023
Bail Application - Offence under Section 376(2)(N) of IPC - The court allowed the bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the circumstances and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to an offence under Sections 376(2)(N) of IPC. The prosecutrix alleged that she was repeatedly raped by the applicant on the false promise of marriage.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, found that further pretrial detention of the applicant was not warranted and allowed the bail application.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail in the case involving allegations of rape on the false promise of marriage.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the facts and circumstances of the case and decided that the applicant's further pretrial detention was not warranted, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail with specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J. - This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to FIR No.51/2023 dated 4.3.2023 registered at Police Station Satai District Chhatarpur (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 376(2)(N) of IPC. He is in detention since 16.3.2023.
2. A s per the prosecution story, on 4.3.2023, 20 years old married prosecutrix filed an application in writing alleging that she knew Ajay Sharma for last 4-5 years. One year ago she was married with one Jitendra Yadav. On 30.10.2022 she left home for Bhopal with Ajay, after 2-3 days she came back to her parental home. After two months, she again went with Ajay and stayed with him at Bhopal. Ajay on the false promise of marriage kept her with him but on 8.2.2023 he left her at Bhopal and did not come back. She came back to her parental house. In Bhopal, Ajay had repeatedly committed rape upon her. FIR was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has not committed any offence. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. No sexual intercourse was committed by him on the false promise of marriage. Prosecutrix is married. FIR has been registered just to pressurize and exploit him. Therefore, it has been prayed that applicant be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed grant of bail to the applicant.
5. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the view that it is a case in which further pretrial detention of the applicant/accused in not warranted.
6. Consequently, this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant, stands allowed.
7. It is directed that applicant - Ajay Sharma be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by it during trial. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
8. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
9. 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 merit of the case.
The court's decision to grant bail in a rape case was based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, and may impose specific conditions for the grant o....
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the nature of the offence, the stage of the trial, and the likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution 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
