SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijay Dhingra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 June, 2018

1

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.4110/2018
(Vijay Dhingra Vs. State of M.P. Anr.)

Gwalior, dated 04.06.2018
Shri Amit Sharma Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned
counsel for the appellant.
Shri J.M. Sahani, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent No.1/State.

Shri Anshu Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent
No.2.

This alleged first Criminal Appeal filed under Section
14-A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short
“Act”) on behalf of appellant against the order dated
25.05.2018 passed by Special Judge (SC ST Act), Gwalior,
whereby regular bail application filed under
Section 439 of
the Cr.P.C. on behalf of present appellant was dismissed, is
listed for admission and for consideration of I.A.
No.4216/2018 filed on behalf of appellant for early hearing of
criminal appeal and I.A. No.4215/2018 filed on behalf of
appellant for hearing of this criminal appeal during summer
vacation.

Today, I.A. No.4438/2018 has been filed by Shri Anshu
Gupta, counsel on behalf of respondent No.2 for permitting
her counsel to assist the Public Prosecutor along with
Vakalatnama bearing thumb impression of respondent No.2.

Appearing counsel for the parties heard on I.A.
No.4438/2018. In view of the reasons mentioned in the
application, I.A. No.4438/2018 is allowed and counsel for the
respondent No.2 is permitted to assist the learned Public
Prosecutor.

Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
2

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.4110/2018
(Vijay Dhingra Vs. State of M.P. Anr.)

respondent No.1/State intimates that the relating case diary
of crime No.395/2018 registered at police station Bahodapur,
Gwalior in reference to offence punishable under
Sections
458,
376, 506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act is
available; hence, with consent of appearing counsel for the
parties, arguments were heard finally. Produced case diary
and other documents are perused.

According to prosecution’s version, about 25 years’ old
married respondent No.2/complainant/prosecutrix lodged FIR
in the intervening night of 19-20th May of 2018 at 00:25
hours at Police Station Bahodapur to the effect that on
19.05.2018 at 22:30 hours, when she was alone with her
minor child in tenanted house of Parshuram Singh Tomar at
Bahodapur, then after knocking the door, appellant Vijay
Dhingra having a pistol in his hand entered into her house
and took her into room and after lying herself on her bed and
after showing his pistol and threatening her that he would kill
her and her minor son Montu, appellant committed rape with
her. At the same time, her husband came back to the house
with Raju, then appellant after threatening her husband fled
away. On the FIR lodged by the prosecutrix, crime
No.395/2018 was registered and respondent No.2/prosecutrix
was sent for medical examination and appellant was arrested
on 22.05.2018 and a pistol with its license was seized from
appellant vide seizure memo prepared on 22.05.2018.

Present appellant filed regular bail application under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before Special Judge (SC ST Act)
Gwalior, which was dismissed by impugned order dated
3

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.4110/2018
(Vijay Dhingra Vs. State of M.P. Anr.)

25.05.2018. Hence, this criminal appeal has been filed.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the
appellant that appellant has been falsely implicated in the
crime as it is clear from the FIR that prosecutrix reached for
lodging FIR against the appellant to police station with some
contractors and the story of committing rape in the night at
10:30 pm is totally unbelievable and unnatural and
prosecutrix in her statement recorded by JMFC Gwalior under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C has stated nothing against the present
appellant and has not stated anything regarding rape and
before Special Court, she filed an application that she is
having no objection in granting bail to the present appellant
but the concerned Special Judge erred in dismissing the
present appellant’s regular bail application. It is further
submitted by the appellant by placing reliance on the
photocopies of treatment of the appellant that he is a heart
patient and completion of the investigation and thereafter
trial will take sufficient time in its conclusion. Hence, it is
prayed that his appeal be allowed and impugned order
dismissing his bail application be set aside and he be ordered
to be released on regular bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of respondent No.1/State strongly opposed the appeal
filed by the appellant but it has been fairly admitted by the
appearing Public Prosecutrix that respondent
No.2/prosecutrix has not deposed anything against the
present appellant in her statement recorded under
Section
164 of Cr.P.C by the concerned JMFC, Gwalior, whose copy is
4

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.4110/2018
(Vijay Dhingra Vs. State of M.P. Anr.)

enclosed in the case diary.

Appearing counsel for the respondent No.2 is having
no objection if appellant’s appeal is allowed.

Considered the rival contentions raised on behalf of
learned counsel for the parties. It is clear from the FIR, that
alleged rape was committed at about 10:30 pm, where
respondent No.2 was alone in her house with her minor child.
According to her MLC report, no injury was found on her
body and private part. Present appellant was arrested on
22.05.2018, but the major and married respondent No.2 has
stated nothing against the appellant or regarding rape in her
statement recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C. by the
concerned JMFC, Gwalior.

It is clear from the impugned order passed by Special
Judge (SC
ST Act) Gwalior that before Special Court, it was
expressed by prosecutrix’s counsel that prosecutrix is having
no objection, if bail application of present appellant is
accepted and it also appears from the impugned order that
prosecutrix had appeared before the Special Court with her
counsel.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the
case and looking to the facts that the completion of
investigation and thereafter trial will take sufficient time and
in view of the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C, it appears that appellant’s appeal is
worthy of acceptance. Consequently, appeal filed by the
appellant under Section 14-A of SC
ST Act is allowed and
the impugned order dated 25.05.2018 passed by Special
5

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.4110/2018
(Vijay Dhingra Vs. State of M.P. Anr.)

Judge (SC ST Act) Gwalior is set aside and it is ordered in
relation to his bail application that the appellant be released
on regular bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of
Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand Only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the CJM, Gwalior for appellant’s regular appearance before
the Court concerned with following conditions:-

1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and
conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial,
as the case may be;

3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.

4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to
the offence of which he is accused;

5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments
during the trial; and

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous
permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as
the case may be.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for
compliance.

C.c. as per rules.

(Ashok Kumar Joshi)
V.Judge

Ashish

Digitally signed by
ASHISH CHOURASIYA
Date: 2018.06.05
15:39:37 -07’00’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Group Rules, If You agree then JOIN HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh