JITENDRA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant has filed this application under Sec. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for cancellation of the bail given to the non-applicant Jasmat S/o Jagdish Sendhav vide order dtd. 8/1/2024 passed by the trial Court.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that on 10/12/2023, when the prosecutrix was alone at her home at around 1 o'clock, accused approached her and sexually assaulted by touching the private parts of the prosecutrix with brutal intention of committing rape upon her. Accordingly, offence has been registered against the respondent No. 2.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the gravity of the evidence as well as statement of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix has specifically stated in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C. that the accused came to her home and asked about her father, when she replied that no one was in the house, the accused caught the prosecutrix with bad intention and threatened her. Counsel has also pointed out that less than 1 month of incarceration and the age of the prosecutrix is less than 14 years whereas the age of the accused/respondent No. 2 is 42 years in spite of that, trial Court has granted bail to the accused/respondent No. 2. The offence committed by the accused is heinous in nature. Therefore, respondent No. 2 does not deserve for bail. Hence, he prays that the bail granted to the respondent No. 2 Jasmat be cancelled.