Jaiprakash Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the accused/applicant for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.17/2022 registered at Police Station Samripaath, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, for the offence punishable under Sections 376 (2) (ढ) of IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act.

Prosecution case, in brief, is that in April, 2016 the applicant was posted as Panchayat Secretary and residing at Village Tatijhariya on rent near the house of the complainant. Allegation against the applicant is that on 18.08.2016 in the night at about 8 PM the applicant allured the minor prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and committed rape with her. After sometime, he started living on rent in the complainant’s house and used to made physical relationship with her. It is alleged by the complainant that in the year 2018 when the applicant was transferred to Kusmi he abducted her and took her with him at Village Kusmi and made sexual relationship with the prosecutrix several times. Further, in the year 2020 the applicant transferred to Wadrafnagar and there also, he took the prosecutrix with him and there also sexually exploited her. It is also alleged that the applicant got indulged in a dispute with Ramashankar, Dayashankar and Bramhadev and thereafter by using the prosecutrix lodged an FIR against them for committing rape with the prosecutrix on 16.09.2020. The said FIR was registered as FIR No.0/2020 at Mahila Thana, Surguja on 24.10.2020. However, after lodging of such FIR, prosecutrix given the statement that present applicant was threatening to kill her and also threatened for not continuing the relationship with her and also pressurized her to lodged a false FIR against the aforesaid 3 persons. The prosecutrix has given such statement in Misc. Criminal Case No.17/2021 recorded on 24.06.2021 before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balrampur, Ramanujganj where she has also stated no objection while closing the prosecution case against the aforesaid persons. Thereafter, prosecutrix lodged the instant FIR against the present applicant for the offence mentioned above.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been been falsely implicated in the crime in question. Learned counsel further submits that prosecutrix taken Rs.50,000 in cash and cheque of Rs.30,000/- from the complainant as loan for opening tailor shop and she had also taken one mobile from him and she has promised that she will return the said money within 3 months otherwise her father will transfer 5 acre land in the name of the applicant. However, she has not return any money and committed cheating with the applicant. Counsel further submits that on 06.11.2020 one police personnel namely Vinod Paswan arrested him without any intimation and after threatening him looted his golden locket, mobile phone and amount of Rs.46,220/- which was kept in his pocket. For the aforesaid two incidents, the applicant has made a complaint before Sub Divisional Officer, Wardrafnagar on 05.07.2021. Learned counsel also submits that lodging of FIR against the applicant is abuse of process of law as earlier the prosecutrix lodged an FIR against Ramashankar, Dayashankar and Bramhadev stating that they have committed rape with her and thereafter she retracted from her statement and implicated the present applicant by making false story that the applicant has blackmailed her for lodging such FIR. Learned counsel also submits that relatives of the complainant have committed rape with the minor niece of the applicant who is aged 10 years and for the same the applicant along with his minor niece made a complaint to the CG State Woman Commission, Raipur on 07.03.2021 and in turn the said complaint was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Surajpur on 24.03.2021 for taking necessary action. Therefore, to save herself and her family members, prosecutrix lodged the instant FIR. Learned counsel lastly submits that during the closure statement of the FIR lodged against Ramashankar, Dayashankar and Bramhadev, the prosecutrix no where stated about the alleged rape committed on her. Therefore, considering all these aspects the applicant be released on anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned State counsel strongly opposes the bail application and submits that prosecutrix in her statement recorded on 24.06.2021 in Misc. Criminal Case No.17/2011 clearly stated that applicant was posted as Panchayat Secretary in her village for the period 2016 to 2018 and during such period the applicant kept the prosecutrix as a wife and also pressurized her to lodge an FIR against the aforesaid 3 persons. Therefore, conduct of the applicant itself shows that for protecting himself he has created so many stories, therefore, applicant do not deserve benefit of anticipatory bail.

Having considered the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the nature of accusation; allegation levelled against the applicant; backdrop of the case; particularly considering the statement of the prosecutrix recorded in Case No.17/2021 where prosecutrix herself stated that the applicant took the prosecutrix with him as a wife for long period, threatened to kill her as also pressurized her to lodge complaint against the aforesaid 3 persons, this Court is opinion that allegation levelled against the applicant is serious in nature and thus, present is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed.