RAJNISH PARMAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first bail application has been filed by applicant under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.573 of 2023 registered at Police Station Padav, District Gwalior (M.P.) for offences punishable under Ss. 376(2)(n), 363, 366, 370, 376, 323, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of POCSO Act. The applicant is in judicial custody since 2/10/2023.

(2.) As per the case of prosecution, victim submitted a written complaint with PS Padav, Gwalior that she is aged around 15 years. Raju Dandotiya was taking advantage of illness of her father, compelled her into prostitution. Raju Dandotiya took her to hotel Amar Palace and left her with Manager Rajnish Parmar. There were other girls present in the hotel. The girls advise her to involve in profession of prostitution. One of the person named Prathvi Sankhvar took her to Room No.107 and committed rape on her. She escaped from the hotel and reported the incident. On such allegations, PS Padav registered FIR at Crime No.573 of 2023 for offence punishable under Ss. 376(2)(n), 363, 366, 370, 376, 323, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3/4 of POCSO Act. Police force of PS Padav conducted raid on hotel Amar Palace wherein applicant Rajnish Parmar was arrested along with other co-accused. Statement of victim was recorded under Ss. 161 and 164 of CrPC. Investigation is underway.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that no role is alleged against the applicant in the alleged offence. He was working as Security Guard at hotel Amar Palace. The arrest memo also shows the profession of applicant as private security guard. He was taken into custody for the reason that he was present on duty at the parking of the hotel. Applicant has a family to look after and he is sole bread earner in the family. There is no likelihood of his absconding leaving family and property. There is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence. No criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant. Jail incarceration on false charges would cause great hardship to the family of the applicant. The trial would take time to complete. Therefore, applicant may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail