AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
The applicant has filed this first application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Lahar, District Bhind, in connection with Crime No.175/2017 registered in relation to the offences
punishable under sections 366, 376B, 323, 506 of the IPC and 11/13 of the MPDVPK Act.
Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that on 13/7/2017 between 8 and 9 PM, he along with co-accused Balram Dadoriya, Monu Pachori and
two others went to the house of prosecutrix and on gun point not only took documents relating to her studies and Rs.25,000/- kept in an Almirah, but
also threw the prosecutrix in a vehicle standing outside after tying her mouth and threatened to kill her and her brother. Thereafter, they took her to
Gwalior and Bhopal and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse till 5/10/2017 while recording its video. They also took the signatures of
prosecutrix on marriage related documents under threat of uploading such video on the Internet.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. In fact, the prosecutrix has solemnized marriage with co-
accused Balram on 1/7/207. On 25/7/2017, she had even filed a report apprehending attempt on her life from her father as he was opposed to such
marriage. She had even filed W.P. No.5547/2017 seeking protection from her family. It is submitted that on 13/10/17, the prosecutrix had even lodged
a report against her husband Balram, but at that time had not disclosed about any such incident with her, which prima facie reflects that the allegations
are nothing but an after thought. Applicant is a permanent resident of Ward No.4, Lahar, District Bhind and there is no likelihood of his absconsoin or
tampering with the prosecution evidence. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection contending that on the basis of the allegations and
the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. It is submitted that even in her statement recorded under section 164 of the
Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has categorically reiterated the narration made in FIR. Besides, report of chemical analyst is corroborative. As such, no
indulgence is warranted at this stage.
Considering the nature of allegations and gravity of offence, in the opinion of this Court, no case for grant of bail is made out at this stage.
The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. However, the applicant shall be at liberty to revive the prayer after evidence of the prosecutrix before
the trial Court.