Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/56856/2023 of DHEER SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGHON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56856 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
DHEER SINGH S/O BALWANT SINGH, AGED ABOUT 56YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOB R/O SHEKHPUR JALON ATPRESENT 374/12 SECTOR A NANDBAG COLONY INDORE(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI VIVEK SINGH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATIONHOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATIONBANGANGA, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.VICTIM X THROUGH P.S. BANGANGA, INDOREDIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI AJAY RAJ GUPTA APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATEGENERAL.
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 first application filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of regularbail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 relating to FIRNo.1738/2023 dated (not mentioned), registered at Police Station-Banganga,District-Indore M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n),294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant is in custody since12.11.2023.
2. As per prosecution story, the allegation against the applicant is that hehas committed rape upon the prosecutrix.
3 . Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant isinnocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted thatthe present case if filed against the applicant only as a counter blast against theapplicant because the applicant has executed a declaration of eviction againsthis son and prosecutrix. In this case, the prosecutrix is daughter-in-law of theapplicant. That apart, the husband of the prosecutrix has filed a missing reporton 18.06.2023 and thereafter, he had also given a legal notice to his wife on12.07.2023 in which he has leveled allegations against the prosecutirx for badbehavior towards his parents, therefore, the present case has been filed againstthe applicant. The FIR is delayed by one month and no explanation has beengiven. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since12.11.2023. Final conclusion o f the trial is likely to take sufficient long time,therefore, it is prayed that the application be allowed and the applicants bereleased on bail.
4. Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed theprayer and prays for its rejection.
5. Having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, custody period of the applicant, I am inclined to release the applicant onbail. Consequently, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, bailapplication under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed onbehalf of applicant, stands allowed.
6. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one 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 becomeineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)JUDGE amit