SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Raju Ahirwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.31864/2021
(Raju Ahirwar Vs. The State of M.P. another)
(1)

Gwalior, dated : 14/7/2021

Shri Mukesh Chandra Pathak, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri P.P.S.Bajeeta, G.A. for the respondent/State.

Heard through Video Conferencing.

I.A. No.19028/2021, an application for urgent hearing is

allowed.

Case diary perused.

This is third application, under section, 439 of the Cr.P.C. for

grant of bail. The first one was dismissed as withdrawn vide order

dated 29/9/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 36159/2020 and the second

application was rejected on merits vide order dated 7/12/2020 passed

in M.Cr.C. No. 44649/2020.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Indarganj,

District Gwalior in connection with Crime No.206/2020 registered in

respect of the offences punishable under sections 354, IPC and 9/10

of the POCSO Act.

Prosecution story, in short, is that on 19/7/2020, at about 1.30

AM in the night, the applicant kissed the prosecutrix and tried to

outrage her modesty.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has

been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 24/8/2020. Charge

sheet has been filed. No further custodial interrogation is necessary.

Applicant is step-father of the prosecutrix. He has no criminal
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.31864/2021
(Raju Ahirwar Vs. The State of M.P. another)
(2)

antecedents. Due to COVID-19 outbreak, there is no possibility of

conclusion of trial in near future and detention of applicant in

already congested prisons may be detrimental. There is no

likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution

evidence and he is ready and willing to abide by the terms and

conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid

submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the

application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the

basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case

for grant of bail is made out.

However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of

the rival contentions at this juncture.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking into

consideration the period of custody coupled with the fact that owing

to second wave of COVID 19 the trial is held-up and there is a need

to de-congest the prisons which are potential hotspots of infection,

this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the

case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant

be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.

50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the

like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for

his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. The
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.31864/2021
(Raju Ahirwar Vs. The State of M.P. another)
(3)

applicant shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide

by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders

issued by the Central Government, State Government and local

administration from time to time such as maintaining social

distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of

Corona virus.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the

following conditions by the applicant :-

1. The applicant shall install Aarogya Setu App (if not
already installed) in his mobile phone.

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

3. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial,
as the case may be;

4. The applicant will not indulge 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 or to
the Police Officer, as the case may be;

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

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

7. If the applicant commits any offence while on bail,
this order shall automatically stand cancelled
without reference to the Court.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for

compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.

Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari)
Judge
(and)

ANAND SHRIVASTAVA
2021.07.15 09:58:33 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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