UDAYBHAN GURJAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Abhishek Bindal, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 being aggrieved by order dated 19.06.2019 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Morena; whereby, bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. of appellant has been rejected. Appellant is in confinement since 26.06.2019, in connection with Crime No.229/2019, registered at Police Station Joura, District Morena, for offences punishable under Sections 365, 366 and added Section 376, 34 of IPC, Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that false case has been registered against him, only role attributable over the appellant is in respect of Section 363 of IPC and no ingredients of Section 376 exists in the statement. Two statements were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of prosecutrix in which supplementary statement for the first time indicates implication in specific terms against the present THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Criminal Appeal No.6347/2019 (Udaybhan Gurjar Vs. State of M.P. and another) appellant. He fairly submits that looking to the nature of allegation and the fact that prosecutrix has conceived and pregnant, therefore, he is ready to give his DNA samples for DNA test. Charge-sheet has already been filed. Confinement since 26.06.2019 amounts to pretrial detention. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial and make himself available as and when required by the trial court. He would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant party in any manner. On these grounds, he prayed for grant of bail to the appellant. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail application and submits that requisites samples of appellant shall be taken soon for DNA test. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as the fact situation, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this appeal in the following terms. It is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.

(3.) This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Criminal Appeal No.6347/2019 (Udaybhan Gurjar Vs. State of M.P. and another) following conditions by the appellant :-