1

M.Cr.C.8977/2017
(Anil Vs. State of M.P.)
30.08.2017
Shri P.S.Bhadoria, learned counsel for the
applicant.
Mrs. Sangeet Pachori, learned Public Prosecutor
for the respondent/State.

Appearing counsel for the parties heard on first
bail petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before
this Court in relation to Crime No.319/2017
registered at Police Station Thatipur, District Gwalior
in reference to offences punishable under Sections
343, 366, 376-D and 506 of the IPC and the
produced case diary perused.

Applicant’s bail petition under the same
provision has already been dismissed by Eleventh
Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior on 3.8.2017 and
certified copy of above mentioned order has already
been filed with the bail petition.

Appearing counsel for the applicant contends
that prosecutrix is about 26 years old married lady
and is a relative of present applicant and applicant
has been falsely implicated in the case as allegedly
the offence committed from 1.4.2017 to 4.4.2017,
but FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix on 24.6.2017.
On placing reliance of photocopy of the proceedings
occurred before the Councilor (Paramarsh Datri) of
Mahila Police Station, Gwalior, it has been contended
2

that the prosecutrix with her husband had appeared
on 4.4.2017 before the above mentioned Councilor
(Paramarsh Datri) at Mahila Police Station, Gwalior
due to her dispute with her husband, hence the
reason mentioned in the FIR appears to be totally
false. It is further contended that according to the
proceedings written by Councilor (Paramarsh Datri) of
above mentioned Mahila Police Station, prosecutrix
also appeared in the same police station on
11.4.2017, 25.4.2017 and 24.5.2017, hence it is
prayed that the benefit of regular bail be given to the
applicant Anil.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor
appearing for the State contends that the prosecutrix
has totally supported prosecution’s case mentioned
by her in FIR and in her statement under Section 164
of the Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Gwalior recorded on 29.6.2017 and according
to prosecutrix’s version, applicant-Anil is Dewar (son
of Bua Saas/mother-in-law of the prosecutrix).

According to prosecution’s case on 1.4.2017 in
the morning Anil came to the house of the
prosecutrix and intimated her that her husband has
been injured in an accident occurred near Dholpur
(Rajasthan) and her husband had called her, then
prosecutrix after taking some money and her six year
old daughter went to Railway Station, Gwalior with
Anil, where Anil administered her something mixed
3

with water, thereafter she became unconscious and
after assuming conscious she found herself locked in
a room, where Anil’s friend Dharamveer was present,
thereafter in that room she was gang raped by
Dharamveer and Anil repeatedly for three days and
she was also beaten and thereafter Dharamaveer
dropped her at Railway Station, Delhi but her
daughter was kept by Dharamaveer and she was
threatened that if any one will be intimated by her,
then her Daughter would be killed, thereafter in the
morning of 4.4.2017 she came to her house at
Gwalior but being threatened, she did not disclose
the incident to any one and after one day, Anil left
her daughter outside her house, but after some time
Anil started harassing her disclosing the fact that he
has prepared her video clips and it will be uploaded
on the internet, thereafter she intimated the total
incident to her husband and on 24.6.2017 with her
husband reached to the Police Station, Thatipur,
Gwalior for reporting the matter.

According to MLC report of the prosecutrix
recorded on 24.6.2017 by the lady doctor, no mark of
any injury was found on the body and private parts of
the prosecutrix and as the incident was about 84
days back, slide of vaginal swear of prosecutrix was
not prepared and the lady doctor was unable to give
any definite opinion regarding recent intercourse with
the prosecutrix. Photocopy of the recorded
4

proceedings of Councilor (Paramarsh Datri) of the
Mahila Police Station, Gwalior for the dates 4.4.2017,
11.4.2017, 25.4.2017 and 24.5.2017 have been filed
with the bail petition under consideration and same
photocopies were also filed for consideration of bail
petition before above mentioned Additional Sessions
Judge. The relating photocopies of above mentioned
proceedings are bearing signatures of the prosecutrix
and her husband. These proceedings recorded by the
Councilor (Paramarsh Datri) reveal totally different
picture of the case.

According to proceedings written on 4.4.2017
prosecutrix intimated to the above mentioned
Councilor that she was married about 12 years back
and is having three children from her husband Sonu
but as her husband doubted her and gave beating to
her, she is not desirous to live with him and wants to
take divorce from her husband and is willing to live
with her Dewar (son of her Bua Saas/mother-in-law),
who is also ready to keep her and she will not live
with her husband in future at any cost and she may
be sent to the Nari Niketan and on 4.4.2017 the
present husband of the proxsecutrix intimated to
above mentioned Councilor (Paramarsh Datri) that his
wife is having affairs with son of his Aunt (Bua) and
due to this affair his wife left his house and was out
of his house for last four days and his wife is desirous
to live with his Aunt’s son, but he is desirous to keep
5

his wife with him. According to this proceeding on
4.4.2017 prosecutrix voluntarily proceeded to her
parents house as next date before the Councilor was
fixed on 11.4.2017. The proceedings of 4.4.2017 also
appearing to be signed by Anil (present applicant).
On 11.4.2017, the prosecutrix along with her
husband appeared before the Councilor and both of
them intimated to the Councilor that now they have
compromised the matter and prosecutrix will live
with her husband, but she is being threatened by
above mentioned Anil and his family members that if
she lodged report against Anil, then their daughter
would be killed. According to proceedings recorded
on 25.4.2017 and 24.5.2017 prosecutrix also
appeared before the same Councilor (Paramarsh
Datri) and both of them intimated that now they are
living cordially and prosecutrix is not having any
difficulty with her husband.

Considering these proceedings recorded at
Mahila Police Station and signed by prosecutrix, her
husband and even by applicant Anil on 4.4.2017,
without commenting on the merits of the case,
looking to all these abnormal facts and circumstances
of the case and delayed F.I.R., applicant appears to
be entitled for benefit of regular bail. Hence, the
application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is
allowed and it is ordered that on furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
6

fifty thousand only) by the applicant with a solvent
surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of CJM,
Gwalior for his regular appearance before the court
concerned with following conditions, the applicant-
Anil be released on regular bail:-

1) Applicant shall not commit any offence in
future.

2) The applicant shall not try to influence the
prosecutrix and other prosecution witnesses by any
means.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Ashok Kumar Joshi)
Judge

vv