High CourtsSingle Bench

Parmanand vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And another

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 MP CK 0041

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anand Pathak, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366, 376(3) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 5(j), 6
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 49169 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

17 paragraphs · 527 words

Heard on I.A. No.228/2020, an application for correction. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for withdrawal of said I.A. on the ground that due to inadvertence, bail application number could not be mentioned by the office of trial court, therefore, he is unable to refer the bail application number of trial court.

Considering the submission, I.A. stands dismissed as withdrawn and applicant is allowed to advance argument on the basis of crime number written in the cause title.

Office objection stands ignored.

With consent heard finally.

The applicant has filed this first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail, who has been arrested and is in custody since 11.11.2019, in connection with Crime No.368/2019, registered at Police Station Ishagarh, District Ashoknagar (MP), for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) of IPC and Section 5(j)/6 of POCSO Act.

It is the submission of counsel for the applicant that the false case has been registered against him and he is suffering confinement since 11.11.2019. Perusal of statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. indicates an improbable events. Prosecutrix left her maternal home on her own volition and she lived with the applicant for some months and out of that relationship, a girl child was born. Charge-sheet has already been filed. Confinement amounts to pretrial detention. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial and make himself available as and when required by the trial court. He would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the prosecution witnesses in any manner. He further undertakes to do some community service. Under these grounds, he prayed for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned PP for the State opposed the prayer made by the applicant and prayed for dismissal of this application.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as fact situation of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on 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 the concerned trial Court.

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

1.

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

2.

The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3.

The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4.

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5.

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

6.

The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial court for information.