IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH ON THE 4^th OF JULY, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5789 of 2022 Between:-

DILIP S/O DHANNALAL MEDA , AGED ABOUT 21 Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE BHOPAWAR, TEHSIL SARDARPUR, DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI NILESH DAVE, ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THRU. P.S. SARDARPUR, DIST.

DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI SUDHANSHU VYAS, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

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

ORDER

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is fifth repeat application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the applicant, as he has been arrested on 20.11.2019 in connection with Crime No.474/2019 registered at Police Station Sardarpur, District Dhar (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506 of IPC.

Applicant's first bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. was Signature Not Verified SAN dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 06.01.2020 passed by this Court in MCRC No.54752/2019 with liberty to file fresh application after recording the statement of prosecutrix. Applicant's second, third and fourth bail applications u/S 439 of Cr.P.C. were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 07.09.2020, 10.08.2021 and 21.12.2021 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 22970/2020, M.Cr.C. No. 35761/2021 and M.Cr.C. No. 54209/2021 with the same liberty to renew the prayer after recording of statement of prosecutrix.

Prosecution story, in brief is that on 19.11.2019, as prosecutrix was returning home, applicant forcefully took her towards nursery and assaulted her and thereafter committed rape upon her. Accordingly, case has been registered against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that admittedly prosecutrix was major at the time of incident. She on earlier occasion also has lodged report against the applicant which was registered as Crime No. 25/2016 and at that time, applicant was a juvenile. It is also submitted that applicant in the aforesaid case was acqutted vide order dated 05.01.2018 passed by the Juvenile Court Distt. Dhar in the aforesaid criminal case. Statement of prosecutrix has been recorded and she has admitted that aforesaid case was filed against the applicant on her report. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid case, also prosecutrix has admitted that she was seen by her sister and cousin brother and, therefore under the pressure of parents, she has lodged the report. Even otherwise, applicant is in custody since 20.11.2019 Charge-sheet has been filed. Trial will take time to conclude and therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, applicant is entitled for grant of bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State has opposed the application and submits that offences alleged against the applicant are serious in Signature Not Verified SAN nature and therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

Having considered the rival submissions, material pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant, age of the prosecutrix, period of custody of applicant which is more than 2 1/2 years and also the fact that statement of prosecutrix has been recorded, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, hence, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that the applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Trial Court during the pendency of trial. It is further directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C.

I n view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19), t