Jagveer Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J

The applicant has filed this third application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.12 of 2022 registered at Police Station Cantt. Guna, District Guna (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 376-D of the IPC and Sections 5, 6 of the POCSO Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant- Jagveer Singh that this is the third anticipatory bail application of the applicant. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 21.06.2022. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent. He has not committed any offence rather he has been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that the applicant is not the main accused of this case. The main accused of this case is Sachin Bhatnagar. The present applicant is 80% disabled by both the legs. Disability certificate is annexed as Annexure A/3. It is further submitted that trial will take time to conclude and there is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from justice and he is ready to cooperate in the investigation. Hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer and has submitted that there is no new ground under which this repeat third anticipatory bail application could be considered by this Court of the applicant. It is further submitted that the alleged offences have been committed by the applicant with the minor girl. Considering the nature and gravity of offence, learned Stated Counsel prayed to reject this anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary as well as documents available on record.

It is apparent from the perusal of the record that the offence is registered under Sections 376(2)(N), 376-D of the IPC and Sections 5, 6 of the POCSO Act wherein the allegation against the present applicant is of committing rape with the minor girl. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of offence along with the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to allow this third application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the application is hereby rejected.