Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/3887/2024 of ROHIT GAUTAM @ GINNY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWALON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3887 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
ROHIT GAUTAM @ GINNY S/O ASHRI KAMTA PRASADGAUTAM, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:LABOR R/O RAMNAGAR KALINGER BANDA U.P.PRESENT ADRESS BEHIND BITNARY HOSPITAL AGRAMOHALLA PANNA DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI YASHPAL PATEL - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHPOLICE STATION KOTWALI DISTRICT PANNA(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.VICTIM A D/O NOT MENTION THROUGH P.S.KOTWALI PANNA DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SMT. NUPUR DHAMIJA - PANEL LAWYER) (NONE FOR THE VICTIM DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE)
.....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
This is second application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of theCr.P.C. for grant of regular bail relating to FIR No.469/2023, dated 02.07.2023registered at Police Station - Kotwali, District - Panna (M.P.) for commission ofoffence punishable under Section 452, 323, 294, 506, 354-B, 376 ofIPC. Applicant is in detention since 02.07.2023.
2. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn and not pressedwith liberty to revive the same after prosecutrix's evidence before the trial Courtvide order dated 24.11.2023, passed in M.Cr.C.No.51856/2023
3. As per the prosecution story, on 06.07.2023, 31 year old prosecutrixsubmitted an application in writing alleging that her husband is an employee inthe Forest Department. Once, when he fell ill, present applicant had donatedblood. It is alleged that on 19.06.2023, at around 9:30 AM, when she washaving lunch with her children, applicant came and made demand for sex andcommitted rape upon her. Thereafter, he continuously raped her. On01.07.2023, he came into her room and asked for the same. When she refusedto fulfil this demand, he abused and beat her. When her son came to rescue her,he beat him too. FIR was registered. After investigation, charge sheet has beenfiled.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has notcommitted any offence. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. He washaving consensual sexual relationship with the prosecutrix who is a 31 years oldlady. As now consensual sexual relationship is not working, a false FIR hasbeen registered. It is further submitted that DNA report has been received and itis negative. Prosecutrix has already been examined before the trialCourt. Therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be released on bail, pendingthe trial.
5 . On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposedthe prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
6. Considering the fact that prosecutrix has already been examined beforethe trial Court. DNA report is negative and now there is no possibility ofinfluencing of the prosecution witnesses and tempering with the evidence, but without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to releasethe applicant on bail. Consequently, this bail application under Section 439 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant,stands allowed.
7 . It is directed that applicant - Rohit Gautam @ Ginny be releasedon bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (RupeesFifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to thesatisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Courtduring trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the concernedCourt on all the dates fixed by it during trial. He shall abide by all theconditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
8. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in caseo f bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall becomeineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
Jasleen
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)JUDGE