High CourtsSingle Bench

Karan Jatav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 11 August 2023 · Citation: (2023) 08 MP CK 0066

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 438, 438(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376(2)(n), 506
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 35664 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 386 words

Satyendra Kumar Singh, J

1.

Case diary is available.

2.

This is first application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail, as the applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.661/2023 registered at Police Station Dabra, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC.

3 . Prosecution case, in brief, is that applicant and prosecutrix both are known to each other as they are relatives. The applicant on the false pretext of marriage took the prosecutrix at various places and committed rape on her repeatedly.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. Applicant as well as prosecutrix both are major and married persons, therefore, the allegation alleged against the applicant that on the false pretext of marriage, applicant committed rape on her, is baseless. Prosecutrix was a consenting party. She in her statement recorded during investigation under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has stated so. He has also filed copy of photographs and whatsapp chat in support his contention. The applicant's custodial interrogation is not required. Under such circumstances, applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

5.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel for complainant has opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations alleged against the applicant are serious in nature, therefore, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail.

6.

Having considered the rival submissions, material pointed out by learned counsel for applicant, age of prosecutrix and her statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and other facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to the enlarged on anticipatory bail hence, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

7 . It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for his appearance before the Trial Court on all dates and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8.

M.Cr.C. stands disposed of, accordingly. Certified copy, as per Rules.