GOPAL SHRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ARGUMENTS heard. C.D. of Crime No. 48/2001 of Mahila Police Station, Sagar for offence U/s. 376 R/w. Sec. 34 and 506 of the I.P.C. perused. It is submitted by Shri Shobhit Aditya that the prosecutrix has withdrawn the complaint. He has drawn the Court's attention to the photocopy of her affidavit dated 22nd June, 2001 wherein Smt. Vimla Jain the prosecutrix is stated to have sworn that she does not want to proceed with the written application submitted by her on 16th June. 2001. It is submitted by Shri Shobhit Aditya that since the prosecutrix has withdrawn the allegations levelled against the petitioner/accused, he deserves the benefit of anticipatory bail.

(2.) SINCE the offence U/s. 376 of the I.P.C. is not compoundable hence, the affidavit sworn by the prosecutrix does not come to the rescue of the petitioner. On a consideration of all the facts and circumstances which are found collected in case -diary, this petitioner is not found entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail and hence this application is disallowed and rejected. In view of aforesaid, M.Cr.P. No. 5543/2001 for grant of ad -interim bail also stands disallowed and rejected.