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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 37028

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ramkumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 10494/2024



Advocates:
Mayank Bajpai,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR th ON THE 13 OF MARCH, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 10494 of 2024 BETWEEN:-

RAMKUMAR YADAV S/O SHRI KHALAK SINGH YADAV, AGED 40 YEARS, R/O GRAM TERAHI POLICE THANA MAYAPUR DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (SHRI MAYANK BAJPAI- ADVOCATE)

AND STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE THANA BAMOREKALAN DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This first bail application has been filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 15/2024 registered at Police Station Bamor Kala, District Shivpuri (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC. The applicant is in judicial custody since 09.02.2024.

A s per the case of prosecution, prosecutrix aged around 23 years submitted a typed complaint on 05.02.2023 with SHO of Police Station Bamor Kala, District Shivpuri inter alia stating that she was married to Jitendra Yadav, but they were divorced on 04.05.2023. She was residing with her relative Kartar Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH Yadav in village Lilwara. On 30.01.2024, Ramkumar Yadav called her on mobile phone and proposed to settle the dispute with her father and uncle. She went to Kaniyadhana. Ramkumar met her there. As her father and uncle could not come, she stayed in the house of relative of Ramkumar for two days. On 02.02.2024, around 08:00 in the morning, Ramkumar was taking her to Chanderi in his jeep. Around 11:30 in the morning, they reached near Bamor Kala.

Ramkumar stopped the jeep. Ramkumar pulled her hand and dragged her in bushes near Madri River. Ramkumar committed rape on her and threatened to kill her, if she informs anybody. Thereafter, Ramkumar took her to Adhiraj hotel in Ashoknagar. Ramkumar hired a room. They stayed in the room. Ramkumar again committed rape with her in hotel room. On 03.02.2024, Ramkumar left her at Ishagarh bus stand. Thereafter, she informed her relative Gabbar Yadav, who suggested that she should report at Police Station Bamor Kala. On such allegations, Police Station Bamor Kala registered FIR at Crime No.15/2024 for offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC against Ramkumar . Prosecutrix was forwarded for medico legal examination. No external or internal injury was found, therefore, no definite opinion was given by the medical expert. Statements of prosecutrix and other witnesses were recorded. Applicant was arrested on 09.02.2024. He is in custody ever since. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted on 29.02.2024.

Learned Counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that applicant is falsely implicated in this matter as he tried to settle the dispute with the family members of prosecutrix. The FIR was delayed without any plausible explanation shows false implication with premeditation. Applicant is aged around 38 years and is Agriculturist by Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH profession. He is sole bread earner of the family, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconsion leaving his family, home and profession. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. No criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant. Trial would take time to conclude. Therefore, applicant may be extended the benefit of bail.

Per contra, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the arguments advanced by both the parties and overall circumstances of the case but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Th

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top