Atul Kewat Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Court: HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Bench: JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

Atul Kewat Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 04 October 2019

Law Point: 

JUDGEMENT

Shri Siddharth Datt, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Rajmani Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act R/w Section 438 Cr.P.c has been preferred by the appellant apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 104/2019 registered at Police Station Mohgaon, Distt. Mandla for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n),450 and 506 of the IPC and also under Section 3(2)(w)(i) and (3)(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has apprised me regarding serve of notice upon the victim/ Respondent No. 2.

According to prosecution case, in the month of April 201, accused/Appellant committed rape several time with the prosecutrix by calling her on his house. The prosecutrix became pregnant four times and abortion was made by the accused/appellant. Thereafter, when the accused did not come to meet her, then prosecutrix informed to family members of accused that under false pretext of marriage, accused spoiled her life. On 30.05.2019, accused came to her house and threatened her for life and told not to marry her.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no evidence on record to show that the appellant has participated in the alleged incident. He submits that appellant and prosecutrix both are adult and having love affair and when this fact came to knowledge of the family members, this false and frivolous allegation were leveled against the appellant . The act of applicant regarding intercourse with the prosecutrix had not been committed on the ground of her cast. It is a case of love affairs between to adult for more then two years. There is inordinate delay of more then two years in lodging the FIR for which no explanation has been given by the prosecutrix. Applicant has no criminal past. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court towards an affidavit given by appellant in which he stated that he is ready to marry with prosecutrix and he never refused her. With the aforesaid, he prays for allowing this bail application.

On the other hand, learned P.L. for the State opposes the submissions of appellant’s counsel and submits that under SC/ST act there is no provision to give anticipatory bail. The prosecutrix has specifically alleged against the appellant. Looking to the seriousness of the offence, his anticipatory bail application may no be allowed.

Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.

According to prosecution, on the false pretext of marriage, the appellant has committed rape upon prosecutrix by which she became pregnant then abortion was made by the accused/appellant. The allegation for threatening is also leveled by the prosecution. So far as legal concept for granting anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act is concerned, Section 18 creates bar to do the same, but in view of the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court that there is no absolute bar against grant o f anticipatory bail in cases under the Atrocities Act, if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide. In the present case, this Court has not hesitation to say that this is a case of consensual sexual relationship for more than two years. Apart from that by way of filing an affidavit, appellant has expressed his will to perform marriage with the prosecutrix.

Therefore, after considering whole facts and circumstances of the case, possibility of false implication of the present appellant cannot be ruled out and there is no prima facie material is available on record to fulfill the requirement of the aforesaid Section of SC/ST Act. Therefore, without commenting on merits, this appeal for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant seems to be acceptable. Hence, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that appellant-Atul Kewat will surrender himself before Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of Certified Copy of this order then on the event of arrest, he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting Authority.

It is further directed that the appellant shall make himself available for interrogation by the Police Officer as and when required.

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

1.The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2.The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3.The appellant 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 appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5.The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6.The appellant 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 Station House Officer for compliance
Certified copy as per rules.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.

You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us