RAKESH KUMAR MEENA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (for brevity 'SC & ST Act ') against the order dated 08/08/2019 passed by Special Judge (SC and ST) Act , Vidisha whereby application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected by the trial Court.

(2.) Appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.395/2019 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District- Vidisha for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC & ST Act.

(3.) It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that a false case has been registered and appellant is apprehending his arrest on the basis of registration of offence referred above. Contents of the FIR indicates improbable events. For seven years since 2012, prosecutrix was in illicit relationship with the appellant and later on, when adultery detected, she filed a complaint just to wriggle out of the allegation of leading adulterous life. Confinement would bring social disrepute and personal inconvenience to the appellant. He referred the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Atendra Singh Rawat Vs. State of M.P. & Others, 2019 (2) MPLJ (cri.) 481 to submit that anticipatory bail is maintainable. He undertakes not to move in the vicinity of the prosecutrix and her family members and would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the prosecutrix and her family members. Appellant further undertakes to cooperate in the investigation as well as trial and would make himself available as and when required. He further undertakes to do some community service. Thus, he prayed for grant of bail.