Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1464/2024 of KALLU @ KALYAN KUSHWAHA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 5 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAVON THE 5[th] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1464 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
KALLU @ KALYAN KUSHWAHA S/O SHRI GULAB SINGHKUSHWAHA, AGED 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AUTODRIVER, R/O VILLAGE PARICHA, PS POHARI DISTRICTSHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI ROMESH PRATAP SINGH - ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANT
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHPOLICE STATION POHARI DISTRICT SHIVPURI(MADHYA PRADESH)POLICE STATION POHARI DISTRICT SHIVPURI(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.PROSECUTRIX THROUGH POLICE STATIONPOHARI, DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI ROHIT SHARIVASTAVA - PANEL LAWYER)
.....RESPONDENT
This appeal 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 first criminal appeal under Section 14 (A) (2) of the ScheduledCastes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafterreferred to as "SC/ST Act") assails the order dated 19.1.2024 passed bySpecial Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Shivpuri (M.P.) whereby, applicationpreferred by the appellant herein under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. relating to CrimeNo. 353 of 2023 registered at Police Station Pohari, District Shivpuri (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 376, 450, 506 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (w) (ii), 3 (2)(v) of SCST Act has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that appellant is innocent andhas been falsely implicated. The entire prosecution story is highly improbablebecause the alleged incident occurred inside the house of prosecutrix where herfather-in-law and her children were also sleeping. However, there is no evidencethat she raised alarm at the time of incident. The incident is said to be occurredon 15.12.2023, however F.I.R. is lodged after delay of two days i.e. 17.12.2023for which no plausible explanation is given. The case is not supported bymedical evidence. The prosecutrix is major and having two children. Underthese circumstances, the entire prosecution story becomes doubtful. Theappellant is in custody since 18.12.2023 and he is having no criminal history.The appellant is the resident of District Shivpuri (M.P.). Conclusion of trial islikely to take time and there is no likelihood of his absconsion, if released onbail. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the appellant.
Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the appealand prayed for its rejection.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but withoutcommenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it isdirected that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond inthe sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one solventsurety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trialCourt/Committal Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the followingconditions by the appellant:-
1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial,as the case may be; 3 . The appellant will not indulge himself in extendinginducement, threat or promise to any person acquaintedwith the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her fromdisclosing such facts to the Court or to the PoliceOfficer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar tothe offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournmentsduring the trial; and
6. The appellant will not leave India without previouspermission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as thecase may be.
Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to theStation House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
AK/-
(SUNITA YADAV)JUDGE