High CourtsSingle Bench

Raju vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 25 November 2019 · Citation: (2019) 11 MP CK 0224

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, 376(2)(i), 376(2)(n) · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 5(L), 6
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 46993 Of 2019
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

7 paragraphs · 396 words

This is repeat (second) application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 234/2018, registered at Police Station-Azad Nagar, District-Indore, for commission of the offences under Sections 363, 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(n) of the IPC alongwith Section 5(L)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

As per prosecution story, it is alleged that the applicant abducted the prosecutrix and committed rape upon her.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a youth of aged about 28 years and he has not committed any offence. The applicant is in custody since 19/06/2018. He has falsely been implicated in the present crime. Earlier application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court, vide order dated 11/12/2018 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 49661/2018 granting liberty to renew his prayer after recording the court statement of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, summons was issued to the prosecutrix on various dates and they have received with the report that she has left the place after vacating the house, however, the concerned police officials have not made any efforts to search the new address of the prosecutrix so that summon could be served upon her. Looking to the service report of the summons issued against the prosecutrix, it is clear that there is no possibility of recording her statement in near future and the applicant cannot be kept in custody unnecessarily. Under these change of circumstances, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail, hence the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.

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 on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

In case of bail jump this order shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.