High CourtsSingle Bench

Nagu Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 10 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0024

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Awasthi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366, 376(2)(n) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012 — Section 4, 5(L), 6
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5753 Of 2020
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

23 paragraphs · 465 words

This first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime

No.278/2013 registered at Police Station Agar, District Agar Malwa (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 (2) (n) of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Section 3 read with Section 4 and Section 5 (L) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offence Act, 2012.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of the allegations made by the prosecutrix regarding abduction and commission of rape on the pretext of

marriage, the case has been registered against the present applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present

crime.

The prosecutrix has been examined before the trial Court on 07.12.2019 and she does not state anything against the applicant and turns hostile.

According to her Court statement, she was major at the time of incident; had gone with the applicant on her own will; later on, solemnized marriage

with him; and now she is having three children from the wedlock of the applicant. Under these circumstances, no alleged offence is made out against

the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 21.08.2019. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. 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

circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that no sufficient ground is

made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he prayed for rejection of the application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the

merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his / her furnishing a personal

bond in the sum  of        Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of

trial Court, for his / her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the Court

concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy, as per rules.