Jaiprakash Soni vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J

This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant is in custody since 10.08.2021 in

connection with Crime No.168/2021 registered at P.S.-Jaisenagar, District- Sagar (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 323,

506, 34 of IPC.

The prosecution story is that on 14.09.2020 at about 9:30 PM, prosecutrix, aged about 17 years 10 months was in her house, thereafter prosecutrix

was missing and FIR was lodged. On dated 15.09.2020, prosecutrix herself appeared before Police Station Jaisenagar, she alleged that present

applicant/accused kidnapped her and detained her in his house, because prosexutrix already lodged a report on dated 26/08/2020 against one

Shivanshu who is the son of the present applicant/accused. The applicant/accused pressurized her to compromise in that case.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant/accused has falsely been implicated in this case. The present applicant/accused is the father

of Shivanshu Soni. He further submits that there was one sided love with Shivanshu, so she alone ran away. Crime No.161/2020 under Section 363 of

IPC was registered. Thereafter, prosecutrix was recovered. She stated that Shivanshu Soni did not commit any offence. On dated 08/03/2020 closure

report is accepted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class and proceeding of Crime No.161/2020 registered under Section 363 of IPC was closed,

therefore, there is no question for the applicant/accused to compromise in that case. Actually, the prosecutrix wanted to get married with the

applicant's son but his son was not ready so prosecutrix was pressurized him to lodge a false case against him. Applicant/accused has no previous

criminal antecedents.

Applicant/accused is in jail since 10.08.2021, charge sheet has been filed. It is time of COVID-19 pandemic, due to this, trial will take time for its final

disposal. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of prosecution witness. Applicant-accused is breadwinner of his

family, if he is kept in custody for an unlimited period, then future of his family will be spoiled. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner

prays for allowing this bail application.

P.L. for the respondent opposed the bail application.

Considering the contention of both the parties and the fact that on dated 26/08/2020 prosecutrix was missing from her house, she was searched but not

found then FIR was lodged, Crime No.161/2020 under Section 363 of IPC has been registered, the prosecutrix stated that she was talking with the son

the present applicant/accused on telephone at that time and her father and brother have reached there and beaten her so she ran away and also stated

that Shivanshu Soni did not commit any offence.

Thereafter, closure report was produced by Investigation Officer and Crime No.161/2020 under Section 363 of IPC was closed.

Porsecutrix herself stated that she herself left the house of the applicant/accused and reached in the house of her parents. There is no criminal

antecedent against the present applicant. Applicant/accused is in jail since 10.08.2021, charge sheet has been filed, it is time of COVID- 19 pandamic,

due to this trial will take time for final disposal, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of prosecution witness. so, it

would not be appropriate to keep the petitioner in jail whole the trial. Therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, application of the petitioner

under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that the appellant- Jaiprakash Soni shall be released on bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh

Only) with two solvent sureties of the amount of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for

his appearance before it on the dates given by the concerned Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant:

The petitioner will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

The petitioner will cooperate in the trial;

The petitioner will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact 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;

The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which him is accused;

The petitioner will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

The petitioner will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the petitioner shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i n suo motto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following

direction to the jail authority:-

The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the petitioner by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The petitioner shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the petitioner is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in

appropriate quarantine facility.

Learned counsel for the State is directed to inform the Victim about this order by supplying a copy of this order.

Certified copy as per rules.