SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dropati Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 August, 2019

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C No.30991/2019
(Droupatibai Vs. State of M.P.)
-1-

Indore, Dt.6.08.2019
Shri Avinash Sirpurkar, learned Senior counsel with Shri
Shivang Soni, counsel for the applicant.
Shri Sandeep Mehta, learned counsel for the
respondent/State.

This is first application under Section 439, SectionCr.P.C for
grant of bail in connection with Crime No.243/2019
registered at Police Station – Khilchipur, District Rajgarh for
commission of offence punishable under Sections 395, Section397, Section307,
Section353, Section342, Section332, Section365, Section427, Section147, Section148, Section149 of IPC and sec. 3/4 of
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.6.2019 during
patrol duty, Head Constable Majid Khan of P.S. Chhapiheda and
Sainik Ashok Rathore received an intimation at 3.45 am (just
after the midnight) that Sunil Prajapati, driver of one Gamma
vehicle bearing registration No. MPO4 BA 9450 has caused
some accident with Sainik Pappu Dangi and coming towards
Chhapiheda. After receiving this information, driver of FAV,
Constable Mohan and Sainik Ramcharan Dangi tried to stop the
vehicle but vehicle of the driver managed to run away towards
Sandawata. They chased the vehicle and also intimated constable
Prashant Dixit and Sainik Vijaysingh who were on duty on
patrolling point. They chased the vehicle upto Somkheda, where
one Mr.Rajpoot intimated them that Gamma vehicle had gone
towards village Bamangaon. They went there in search of the
vehicle, but suddenly 15-16 villagers along with the present
applicant armed with sticks, assaulted over them. They threw
chilly powder in their eyes and snatched Rs.65,000/-, silver ring
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C No.30991/2019
(Droupatibai Vs. State of M.P.)
-1-

and mobile etc.. They kidnapped them and took to the village and
beat them with kicks and fists and sleepers and also prepared a
video eith Droupatibai. The present applicant threatened them
that she will implicate them in a false case of rape. The applicant
and co-accused persons also torn their uniform. After going back
at the police station Majid Khan lodged the FIR.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent. She has no criminal antecedents. The
police officials forcibly entered the house of the applicant. They
outraged her modesty and tried to rape her. To this, FIR was
lodged by her at P.S. Khilchipur under Sectionsection 354 IPC, which is
registered at crime No. 244/2019. To counter this FIR, the police
has registered a false case on the several villagers including her.
She is a woman and is in custody since 25.6.2019. The
conclusion of trial is likely to take sufficient time. In such
circumstances, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
application stating that FIR lodged by the applicant is
subsequent to the FIR registered against her and other co-
accused persons. The petitioner along with the co-villagers
assaulted over the police party who were on duty for
preventing the crime. They misbehaved them, thrashed them,
torn their uniform, caused damage to the public property and
did not allow the police officials to perform their duty, hence
no ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail,
therefore, the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.

I have considered the rival contention of the parties and
gone through the evidence available in the case diary.
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C No.30991/2019
(Droupatibai Vs. State of M.P.)
-1-

Looking to the allegation made against the applicant, FIR
filed by her and other facts and circumstances of the case, but
without commenting on the merits of the case, the application
filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to
be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the
sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with one
solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial
Court, for her regular appearance before the trial Court during
trial with a condition that she shall remain present before the
Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the
conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of SectionCr.P.C..

In case of bail jump, this order shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.

(Virender Singh)
Judge

mk
MUKTA
KAUSHAL
2019.08.07
17:09:43
+05’30’
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
M.Cr.C No.30991/2019
(Droupatibai Vs. State of M.P.)
-1-

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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 read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation