Banti Vishwakarma vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to F I R No. 815/2023 dated 08.11.2023, registered at Police Station Amarwada, District Chhindwara (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 450, 376(2) and 506 of IPC. Applicant is in detention since 09.11.2023.

As per the prosecution story, on 08.11.2023, 28 years old prosecutrix lodged an F.I.R alleging that her husband is mentally ill and on account of his mental illness for the last three years, she is living separate alongwith children. She was tenant in Sunita Verma's house. Banti Vishwakarma was her neighbour. She came into contact with Banti Vishwakarma 8-9 months ago. Banti on the false promise of marriage, on 08.03.2023, committed rape upon her and thereafter continuously established physical relations with her. Being scared of Banti, she did not disclose the incident to anyone. At present she was residing as tenant of Banti Vishwakarma. Lastly on 13.10.2023, Banti established physical relations with her telling that he will give divorce to his wife and will enter into wedlock with her. Now he has refused to do so. F.I.R was registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that parties are major and already married. Both parties were having consensual sexual relationship. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this court towards section 164 Cr.P.C statement of the prosecutrix and has submitted that prosecutrix was a consenting party. No offence of rape is made out. Only because wife of the applicant has got vacated the accommodation let out to her, she has lodged false and manufactured F.I.R. Therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed grant of bail to the applicant.

I have gone through the F.I.R and section 164 Cr.P.C statement of the prosecutrix recorded before the Magistrate and other material on record. Having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case but without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a case in which further pre trial detention of the applicant is not warranted. Consequently, bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant, stands allowed.

It is directed that applicant - Banti Vishwakarma 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 his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by it during trial. He shall abide by all 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 and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.