Golu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

They are heard. Perused the case diary.

Heard on IA No.10092/2019, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of 131 days delay in filing the present criminal appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh has not raised any serious objection in allowing the condonation application.

Looking to the reasons assigned in the application, which is also supported with the affidavit of the learned counsel for the appellant, sufficient ground is made out for condoning the delay.

Accordingly, IA No.10092/2019 is allowed and delay of 131 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned.

The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended by Act of 2015) read with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, feeling aggrieved by order dated 23.04.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (under SC / ST Act), West Nimar Mandleshwar (MP) in Special ST / Bail Application No.25/2015, whereby the prayer for grant of regular bail has been declined.

Appellant has been arrested on 18.02.2019 in connection with crime No.104/2019 registered at Police Station Khargone, District Khargone (MP) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 307, 366, 328, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/181 and 146/196 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and also under Sections 3 (2) (v) and 3 (2) (b-1) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of allegations made by the prosecutrix, the alleged offence under Sections 376-D, 307, 366, 328, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/181 and 146/196 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and also under Sections 3 (2)(v)  and 3 (2) (b-1) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been registered against the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is a young boy aged about 18 years and he has falsely been implicated in the present crime. The prosecutrix has already been examined before the trial Court on 04.12.2019 and she has not stated anything against the appellant and turns hostile. Under these circumstances, no alleged offence is made out against the appellant. He is in custody since 18.02.2019. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Under these circumstance, learned counsel for the appellant prays for grant of bail to the appellant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on bail; hence the appeal filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the criminal appeal filed by the appellant may be accepted. Consequently, setting aside the impugned order, the appeal is hereby allowed. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail upon execution of 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 learned trial Court for his / her regular presence during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No.10483/2019 stands disposed of.