Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/1125/2024 of SANJEEV JATAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAVON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 1125 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SANJEEV JATAV S/O SHRI ANANT SINGH JATAV, AGEDABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGEDHURRA P.S. DEHAT ASHOKNAGAR DISTRICTASHOKNAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI VIVEK KUMAR VYAS, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICESTATION THROUGH POLICE STATION DEHATASHOKNAGAR DISTRICT ASHOKNAGAR M.P. (MADHYAPRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( MS. KALPANA PARMAR - P.L.- APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATEGENERAL).
This application coming on for admission hearing 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 the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 ofthe Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to FIR No. 602 of 2023 registered at PoliceStation Dehat, District Ashoknagar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 376,506 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is an innocent personand has been falsely implicated. He further argued that applicant is the onlyearning member of his family. He further argued that prosecutrix in her statement has stated that she left her house on her own volition and went withthe applicant on his motorcycle and visited many places by motorcycle as wellas by bus and train. However, there is no evidence available on record that theprosecutrix ever tried to escape or raised any alarm against the presentapplicant. She is a major woman aged about 20 years. There is delay in lodgingFIR and no plausible explanation has been put forth by the prosecution inregard to delay in lodging FIR. At the most, this is a case of consensual sexualrelationship. The applicant is in custody since 05/10/2023. Investigation standscompleted by filing of the charge sheet and further custodial interrogation of theapplicant may not be required. The applicant is permanent resident of DistrictAshoknagar. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time and there is no likelihoodof his absconsion, if released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for grant ofbail to the applicant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bailapplication and prayed for its dismissal.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diaryavailable on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but withoutexpressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it isdirected that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond inthe sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the followingconditions by the applicant:-
1) The applicant will comply with all the terms andconditions of the bond executed by him; conditions 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 withthe facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her fromdisclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, asthe case may be; 4 ) The applicant will not commit any other offence orwill not repeat the offence in future. In case, if he/she isfound involving in the offence of the same nature, this bailorder shall stand cancelled automatically without furtherreference to the Bench.
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.
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.
Durgekar
(SUNITA YADAV)JUDGE