Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/46352/2018 of NIKESH KHATARKAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C No.46352/2018 (Nikesh Khatarkar vs. State of
1THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C No.46352/2018
(Nikesh Khatarkar vs. State of M.P.)
Jabalpur, Dated 31.12.2018
Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Counsel with Shri RahulSharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Ms.Namrata Agrawal, learned Government Advocate forrespondent-State.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties This is first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. asapplicant Nikesh Khatarkar apprehend his arrest in connection withCrime No.172/2018 registered at Police Station Damua, DistrictChhindwara for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 315,506 of IPC.
As per prosecution case, for the first time on 22.04.2012 whenprosecutrix was alone in the house, applicant came to her house andcommitted rape with her and thereafter he sexually exploited her onthe pretext of marriage.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant isinnocent and he has been falsely implicated. Prosecutrix is major. It isalleged that for the first time applicant committed rape with theprosecutrix on 22.04.2012, while prosecutrix lodged the report on03.10.2018 and there is no plausible explanation regarding delay inlodging of the FIR. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigationof crime, hence prayed for release of the applicant on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State has supported theprosecution story and opposed the prayer for bail on the ground thatthe applicant committed rape with the prosecutrix and thereafter hesexually exploited her on the pretext of marriage.
Considering the overall facts and totality of the circumstances ofthe case and as of the fact that it is alleged that for first time applicant 2THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C No.46352/2018
(Nikesh Khatarkar vs. State of M.P.)
committed rape with the prosecutrix on 22.04.2012, while prosecutrixlodged the report on 03.10.2018, prosecutrix was major, withoutcommenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed and itis directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connectionwith the aforesaid crime number, he be released on bail upon hisfurnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees FiftyThousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfactionof the Arresting Officer for his regular appearance before the Policeduring the investigation or before the Court during trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of thefollowing conditions by the applicant :-
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.
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms andconditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, asthe case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extendinginducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with thefacts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing suchfacts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to theoffence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournmentsduring the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previouspermission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the casemay be.
C.C. as per rules.
loretta
(Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
Judge