Ajay vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors

The appellant has preferred this appeal (first) under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 (as amended by Act of 2015) read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, feeling aggrieved by order dated 31.01.2020

passed by learned Special Judge (under SC / ST Act), Jhabua (MP) in Special ST / Bail Application No.19/2019, whereby the prayer for grant of

regular bail has been declined.

Appellant has been arrested on 18.08.2019 in connection with crime No.103/2016 registered at Police Station Raipuriya, District Jhabua (MP) for

commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-B, 109, 506 and 376 (2) (n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, under Section 5 (L) read with

Section 6 and Section 5 (J) read with Section 6 and Section 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and also under Section 3

(2) (v) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of allegations made by the prosecutrix (who belongs to SC / ST Category) regarding abduction, criminal

intimidation and rape, the present case has been registered against the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is a youth aged about 22 years and he has not committed any offence. The

prosecutrix and her parents have already been examined before the trial Court and they have not stated anything against the appellant and turn hostile.

It is further submitted that mother of the prosecutrix accepted in her cross examination that at the time of alleged, the age of the prosecutrix was

above 18 years. Under these circumstances, no alleged offence is made out against the appellant. The appellant is in custody since 18.08.2019. There

is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the evidence, if enlarged on bail. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Under

these circumstance, learned counsel for the appellant prays for grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on

bail; hence the appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without expressing any opinion

on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the criminal appeal filed by the appellant may be accepted. Consequently, setting aside the impugned

order, the appeal is hereby allowed. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail upon execution of personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000

(Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his / her regular presence during

trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No.1647/2020 stands disposed of.

C. c. as per rules.