AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pramod Kumar Agrawal, J
1 .This is the third application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.346/2024 registered at Police Station - Kotwali Anuppur, District Anuppur (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 238(3)(5) & 64 of B.N.S. Applicant is in custody since 13.07.2024.
Earlier (second) application of applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.07.2025 passed in MCRC. No.28800/2025.
As per prosecution story, it is alleged that applicant has harassed the deceased due to which she committed suicide. On the basis of which, offence has been registered against present applicant under the aforesaid section.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is in custody since 13.07.2024. It is submitted that the deceased was in relation with co-accused.
She was also in live in relation with the applicant. The deceased used to go to Police Station to lodge the report against her parents. It is further submitted that there are omission and contradictions in the statements of parents of deceased. Co-accused Satan Prajapati has been enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 passed in MCRC. No.44824/2025. Charge sheet has been filed. The conclusion of trial will take considerable time. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant may be granted benefit of regular bail
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and has submitted that the applicant has earlier committed rape with the deceased and in this regard, F.I.R. has been lodged which was registered at Crime No.139/2024 at P.S. Kotwali Anuppur, District Anuppur. The applicant was pressurizing the deceased not to give evidence against him in that case, therefore deceased has committed suicide. The applicant from his mobile No.6261294038 has talked several times with the deceased on her mobile No.7489708092 several times to pressurize her. It is further submitted that from the mobile phone of applicant and other co-accused persons, objectionable material has been recovered. The parents of deceased have also deposed against the applicant. Earlier two bail applications of applicant were dismissed as withdrawn when the Court was not inclined to grant bail. At this stage, minute appreciation of evidence cannot be done. Hence, the applicant does not deserve grant of bail.
Heard learned counsel for rival parties and perused the case diary.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstance of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, present MCRC filed on behalf of applicant, stands dismissed.