Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/2622/2024 of MAHESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGHON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2622 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
MAHESH S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O. VILLAGE LASUDIYA P.S. NOGAON DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(SHRI ANURAG VYAS - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION DHARAMPURI DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(SHRI SURENDRA GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
.....RESPONDENTS
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard and perused the record.
This first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant underSection 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail relating toCrime No.360/2021 dated (not mentioned), registered at Police Station-Dharampuri, District-Dhar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 363, 366-A,376, 376(2)(n), 344, 323 of IPC, 1860 and under Section 3/4 and Section 5(l)/6of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The applicant is in custody since 23.08.2023.
2 . As prosecution story, the applicant has committed rape upon theminor prosecutrix. Hence, the police has registered the case against him.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocentand has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant and the prosecutrixhave resided together for about two years and the prosecutrix has beenrecovered after a lapse of two years. It is further submitted that the applicant isin jail since 24.06.2023. It is also submitted that the final conclusion of the trialis likely to take sufficient long time, hence, it is prayed that the applicant isentitled to be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the factsand circumstances of the case, nature of allegation and custody period, I am ofthe view that it is a case, in which applicant may be released on bail.Consequently without commenting on the merits of the case, bail applicationunder Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed onbehalf of applicant, stands allowed.
6. It is directed that applicantbe released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) withone solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for hisregular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that heshall remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by itduring trial. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section437(3) of Cr.P.C.
7. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case ofbail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
sumathi
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)JUDGE