Maan Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Ors

The appellant has preferred this appeal (second) under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 (as amended by Act of 2015) read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, feeling aggrieved by order dated 09.01.2020

passed by learned Special Judge (under SC / ST Act), Shajapur (MP) in Special ST / Bail Application No.84-A/2019, whereby the prayer for grant of

regular bail has been declined.

Appellant has been arrested on 27.09.2019 in connection with crime No.298/2019 registered at Police Station Agar, District Agar Malwa (MP) for

commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376 (2) (n), 376 (d) (a), 370 (a) (2), 370 Part-I and 506 of the Indian Penal Code,

1860, under Section 3 read with Section 4 and Section 5-G read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and also

under Sections 3 (1) (w) (i) & (ii), 3 (2) (v) and 3 (2) (v-a) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of allegations made by the prosecutrix (who belongs to SC / ST Category) regarding abduction, criminal

intimidation and rape, the present case has been registered against the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the present crime.

The appellant is in custody since 27.09.2019. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed before the trial Court. Earlier appeal

filed for granted of bail on behalf of the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 24.01.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal

No.583/2020 granting liberty to renew his prayer after recording Court statement of the prosecutrix. Now, the prosecutrix has been examined and

cross examined on 04.01.2020 and she has not stated anything against the appellant in her Court statement and turned hostile. Under these

circumstances, no alleged offence has been made out against the appellant. There is no possibility of his / her absconsion or tampering with the

evidence, if enlarged on bail. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Under these circumstance, learned counsel for the appellant prays

for grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on

bail; hence the appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without expressing any opinion

on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the criminal appeal filed by the appellant may be accepted. Consequently, setting aside the impugned

order, the appeal is hereby allowed. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail upon execution of personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000

(Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his / her regular presence during

trial and shall also abide by 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, it shall become ineffective.

Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No.1691/2020 stands disposed of.

C. c. as per rules.