Vikram Thakur vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

I.A. No. 3061/2020, an application for filing the bail application without bar stamp and for urgent hearing of the matter, and I.A. No. 3062/2020, an application for submitting declaration, are taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.

Case diary is available.

This is first application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 08/3/2020 in connection with Crime No. 926/2019 registered at Police Station Janakganj, District Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 376 (2) (N) and 506 of the IPC.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant Vikram Thakur that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He has not committed any offence. There is no ingredient of Section 376 of the IPC as the prosecutrix of this case is a widow lady around 35 years of age. Her husband died in an accident. She came in contact with the applicant through social website on 15/1/2019. Thereafter, they continued meeting each other. The applicant proposed to start business with her and the prosecutrix gave him Two Lakhs rupees for the proposed business. In between in Sharda Hotel, Nai Sadak, Gwalior, the applicant called the prosecutrix and committed rape with her. At that time, he assured that he was not married, thereafter, the prosecutrix came to know that the applicant was already married. The applicant made up the photographs of the prosecutrix viral on social website and exploited her, hence, she lodged the FIR. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that looking to the age of the prosecutrix i.e., 35 years, the present case appears to be a totally consented case and in the light of the Supreme Court judgments passed in the cases of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra, [SLP (Cri) 2712/2019]  and Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., [AIR 2019 SC 327] as well as order dated 23-3-2020 passed by the Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU W.P. (C)      No. 1/2020, the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the Staet has opposed the submission and has submitted that this is not a case of consent. The applicant has misrepresented himself as a married person and due to misrepresentation of fact, the consent could not be gathered. Hence, prays for dismissal of the application.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case and looking to the allegations levelled against the applicant, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is not appropriate to grant bail at this stage.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed with liberty to the applicant to file afresh after recording of evidence of main prosecution witnesses.