SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 35434

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL

ON THE 23rd OF APRIL, 2024

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14761 of 2024

BETWEEN:-

GOLU @ RAJKUMAR CHOUDHARI(SATNAMI) S/O LATE

KAMAL

CHOUDHARI,

AGED

ABOUT

32

YEARS,

OCCUPATION:

FARMER

R/O

LONIBARA,

POLICE

STATION

CHAND,

TEHSIL

CHOURAI

,

DISTRICT

CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT

(BY SHRI R.S. YADAV - ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT)

AND

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE

STATION CHAND DISTRICT CHHINDWARA (MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT

(BY SHRI HEMLATA KSHATRIYA - PANEL LAWYER FOR THE STATE)

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

following:

Advocates:
Rama Shankar Yadav,Advocate General

ORDER

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 Crime No.599/2023 registered at Police Station Chand, District Chhindwara (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC.

Applicant is in detention since 03.01.2023.

2. As per the prosecution story, the allegation against the applicant is that he forcefully committed rape with the prosecutrix. Therefore, the aforesaid offence has been registered against him.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is in jail since 03.01.2023. He has been falsely implicated. FIR has been lodged after delay of two days and delay in lodging the FIR was not explained. It is also submitted that there is contradiction in the statements of prosecutrix and her mother. It is further submitted that firstly on 13.02.2023 NCR under Section 155 of the Cr.P.C. was lodged by the applicant's mother namely Surjo Bai Choudhary against the complainant party vide NCR No.1302/2023 for the offence punishable under Section 504 of the IPC. Thereafter, the present FIR has been registered against the present applicant as a counter blast. Charge sheet has been filed. The trial of the case will take considerable time. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant may be released on bail pending the trial.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant on the ground that applicant threatened the prosecutrix therefore she lodged FIR after delay of two days.

5. After perusal of record, it is found that prosecutrix has stated that applicant has forcefully committed rape with her. Statement of the of prosecutrix has been corroborated by the statement of her mother.

6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this is not the fit case to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, this MCRC stands dismissed. (PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL) JUDGE shahina

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top