Court: HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Bench: JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Shailendra Singh Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others on 14 February 2018
Law Point: Complainant improved allegations in CrPC 164 Statement and added allegations of SC ST Act etc. Anticipatory Bail granted
JUDGEMENT
Shri Arubendra Singh Parihar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Brijesh Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 03/01/2020 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Satna (M.P.) in Bail Application No.44/2019, whereby learned Judge rejected the bail application filed by the appellant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to get anticipatory bail in Crime No.1390/2019, registered at Police Station Kolgawan, District Satna (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (D), 342 and 506 of the IPC, r/w Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act and under section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, who apprehends his arrest in the crime.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. No overact of the appellant has been attributed in the commission of the offence. There is no criminal antecedents of the appellant. He further submits that the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C and under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. varies from each other. Hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the application and prays for it’s rejection.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record including the case diary.
Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate, this application is allowed without commenting 1 CRA-438-2020 anything on merits of the case. It is directed that in the event of arrest or surrender of appellant-Shailendra Singh before the Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer in relation to the aforementioned crime number within a period of 15 days from today, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with a solvent surety in like amount to satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer on following conditions:
(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 extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
(4) The appellant shall not commit any offence during the period in which he is enlarged on bail;
(5) The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;
(6) The appellant shall inform the Investigating Officer/trial Court about him address and residence in case he moves out from his permanent address for any point of time;
(7) The appellant shall not contact any of the other accused persons in this case in any manner whatsoever;
(8) Such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section.
I n the event of breach of any condition imposed by this Court, the complainant/victim/State will be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail granted today.
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