Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1228 (MP)

Vijendra Singh Chouhan v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-10-12

ANIL VERMA

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Crime No. 265/2022 registered at P.S - Tarana, District- Ujjain (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2)(n), 354, 506, 34 of IPC and sections 5-L, 6, 7 and 8 of POCSO Act. 2. As per prosecution story, on 10/06/2022, complainant Dilip Singh lodged a missing person report at police station - Tarana by stating that his minor daughter/prosecutrix is missing from home since 09/06/2022. She left the home by informing that she is going to Bank, but she did not come back. During investigation, it was gathered that co-accused Sanjay abducted the prosecutrix and took her with him at Makshi on motorcycle and kept her in a room and committed rape upon her. Present applicant outraged her modesty and both of them threatened her that they will kill her family members. Thereafter, co-accused Sanjay took her with him at Morvi, Gujrat and repeatedly committed rape upon her. 3. Accordingly, the aforementioned offence was registered and he was arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. There is no legal evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the aforementioned offence. Present applicant is not the main accused, who has committed rape upon the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix did not disclose anything against present applicant in her earlier two statements under section 161 of Cr.P.C Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required.. Applicant is in custody since 23/06/2022 He is permanent resident of District- Ujjain. There is no apprehension of his fleeing away from the court of justice. Final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time. 5. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper. 6. Per-contra, learned PL for respondent - State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection Perused the impugned order of the trial Court, the statements of the witnesses as well as the case dairy by stating that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C that present applicant outraged her modesty and therefore, he does not deserve for bail. 7. 7. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature of allegation as also taking note of the fact that the prosecutrix in her first statement recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C, which was recorded soon afterh recovery of the prosecutrix, did not speak anything against present applicant, but later on, she disclosed the name of the prosecutrix, but the present applicant is not the main accused, who has committed rape upon her; he is in custody since 23/06/2022 investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and possibility of delay in conclusion of the trial cannot be ruled out, in view of the evidence available on record, I deem it proper to release the accused/applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. 9. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C., It is made clear that if the applicant is again found to be involved in any other offence during the trial, this order shall stand cancelled automatically without reference to the Court and the police will be at liberty to arrest the applicant in the present case also. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. 10. Certified copy, as per Rules.