AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
None for the complainant, though served on 06.03.2020.
Heard on appeal filed on 28.02.2020 under section 14-A(1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on behalf
of appellant Rashmi Dubey w/o Rajesh Dubey, who is confined in custody since 30.012020 in connection with Crime No.29/2020, registered at Police
Station Madhotal, District Jabalpur, under sections 365, 370(2), 371, 374/34 of IPC and sections 3(2)(v) of SCST Act.
This criminal appeal has been preferred against the order dated 18.02.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jabalpur in relation to the aforesaid
crime number. The Trial Court dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of CrPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant is a lady and early trial is not possible due to situation arising out from Covid-19.
Counsel also read out the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of CrPC and submitted that the appellant has no any role in selling
the prosecutrix.
On the other side, the counsel for State strongly opposed the appeal. It appears from the record that Mamta, Rashmi Dubey and her husband Rajesh
Pandey all took the prosecutrix to Agra and sold out the prosecutrix to Kamlesh for Rs. 2 Lakhs. Co-accused Kamlesh has been enlarged on bail by
this Court and it was appeared that the aforesaid appellants played mischief by showing and giving the forged Aadhar Card of the prosecutrix in
another name. The role of the present appellant is equal to the other accused Mamta and Rajesh. They took the prosecutrix and sold for State is also
pointed out that previously crime No. 27/2018 was registered against the appellant. The appellant has filed the copy of the judgment dated 11.07.2019
passed in ST No. 167/18 related to the aforesaid crime and submitted that the appellant was acquitted in that case. It appears from the judgment that
the acquittal was not on the merits of the evidence. The prosecutrix became hostile therefore, all accused including the present appellant acquitted
from the charges. The charges under Sections 363/34, 366(ka)/34, 466, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(5)(ka) of SC/ST Act were made against
the present appellant.
Therefore, looking to the gravity of crime, conduct of the appellant and role played in this crime, the appellant is not entitled to get the bail.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed.