PHOOL SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THIS is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

(3.) AS per prosecution case, father of the victim namely Surendra Kumar has lodged the missing report of his daughter aged about 17 years. During enquiry, it was found that daughter of the complainant has changed her statement. She disclosed that Sunil and Patiram came her shop, she was alone Sunil promised her to marry with her and took her on Motorcycle to Datia, thereafter to Sikdaua, thereafter they have brought her to Karera. Phool Singh and Narendra were relative to Sunil. They met and they told Sunil that he should take her to Ahmedabad. Thereafter they sent her on Bus alongwith Sunil to Ahemedabad. It is further submitted that Patiram and Sunil have committed sexual intercourse with the victim, however, in the statement of 161 Cr. P.C. victim has changed her statement and stated that she was in her house and Sunil and Narendra came from back door of her house and thereafter they took her forcibly to Datia where co -accused has committed rape upon her and took her to Ahmedabad.