IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
ON THE 19th OF JANUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 14109 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
MOHAMMAD JAVED ANSARI S/O SHRI SALEEM
ANSARI,
AGED
ABOUT
24
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
LABOUR, R/O GRAM BHASOTH POST MEENAPUR
DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR BIHAR (BIHAR)
.....APPELLANT
(BY MR. VISHAL SHARMA - APPELLANT)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION GWALIOR, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. RAMADHAR CHOUDEY - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
This appeal coming on for Admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the first criminal appeal filed by the appellant under Section 14(A) ( 2 ) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for grant of bail relating to FIR No. 602 of 2023 registered at Police Station Gwalior, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC. Section 3(2)(va), 3(i)(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 67(a) of Information Technology Act.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Entire prosecution story is highly improbable and suspecious. Prosecutrix is a major married woman, therefore, question of promise to marry her by the applicant does not arise. Further submission is that as per prosecution story as well as statement of the prosecutrix she left her husband twice and lived with the present applicant in Surat, however, there is no evidence that she ever tried to escape from the clutches of the appellant or raised alarm. The appellant has no criminal antecedent. The appellant is in custody since 21.09.2023. Investigation has already been completed by filing of charge-sheet, therefore, further custodial interrogation of the appellant may not be required. The appellant is the permanent resident of District Muzaffarpur (Bihar) and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the appellant.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the appeal and prayed for its dismissal.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
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 cooperate 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.C. as per rules. (SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE (LJ*)
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.