Court: HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Bench: JUSTICE C.V. Sirpurkar
Amit Patel Vs. State of M.P. and another on 9 March 2018
Law Point: No specific allegations about SC AT Act, Physical relations established with consent. Anticipatory Bail granted to Accused
JUDGEMENT
Shri Anil Khare, senior counsel with Shri Jasneet Singh Hora, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ashutosh Tiwari, Government Advocate for the respondent no.1/State.
None for the respondent no.2/victim though served.
Heard on this appeal for anticipatory bail under Section 14- A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, filed on behalf of appellant Amit Patel in crime no.05/2018 registered by Police Station- Mahila Thana, Jabalpur, under Sections 376 (2) (n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(w) (i-ii), 3 (2) (5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is directed against order dated 05.02.2018 passed by the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST) Jabalpur in bail application no.277/2018.
As per the prosecution case, the prosecutrix was a 21 years old unmarried girl. She came in contact with the appellant in April, 2017. They fell in love and their marriage was fixed for December, 2017. Meanwhile, the appellant used to visit the prosecutrix at her home at Balaghat and used to establish physical relations. As a result, she conceived twice but on the drugs given by the appellant, she aborted. The physical relations were admittedly established with the consent of the prosecutrix; however, the appellant kept postponing the marriage. Later, the prosecutrix learnt that the appellant had engaged some other girl to marry and his marriage was fixed for 12.02.2018. As such, the 2 appellant physically exploited the prosecutrix on the false promise of marriage.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that admittedly the prosecutrix was a major girl at the time of the incident. The physical relationship between the parties was admitted by the prosecutrix to have been established with her consent. Thus, there is no indication that the consent for sexual intercourse was given under any misconception of fact. As per the prosecution case, the last incident of sexual intercourse took place on 25.08.2017 but the first information report was lodged on 19.01.2018. There is no allegation that there was intention to cheat on the part of the petitioner since inception of the affair. There is no allegation that the fetus of the prosecutrix was aborted without her consent or knowledge. It has further been submitted that in fact, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. He had never established any physical relationship with the prosecutrix. He had only once met her socially and thereafter the prosecutrix started to pursue him. When the appellant did not respond, she threatened him that she would implicate him in a false case of rape. The appellant had lodged a report in this regard against the prosecutrix with Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur on 22.12.2017 (Annexure-A/2 to the petition). As such there is no prima facie case against the petitioner under the provisions of S.C. and S.T.
Prevention of Atrocities Act; therefore, it has been prayed that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State on the other hand has opposed the application; however, he has conceded that there is no medical document on record to suggest that the prosecutrix was ever pregnant. He has also conceded that the medical reports do not support the case of the prosecutrix.
3 In the aforesaid circumstances, there is no prima-facie case under any of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, against him; therefore, in spite of Section 18 of the Act, appellant Amit Patel is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail.
Consequently, this appeal for anticipatory bail under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is allowed. The impugned order is set aside.
It is directed that in the event of his arrest, the appellant Amit Patel shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- with a solvent surety in the same amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for his appearance before the trial Court on all dates and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Certified copy as per rules.
DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.
You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us
Leave A Comment