Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Monday, November 25, 2024

MP HC Asks Person Accused Of Outraging Modesty Of Neighbour To Request Her To Tie The Rakhi With A Promise To Protect Her As Bail Condition

Posted in: Criminal Law
Mon, Aug 3, 20, 16:22, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5379
Vikram Vs Madhya Pradesh released a person who was apprehended for outraging the modesty of a woman on bail. The unique condition that was imposed for releasing him on bail was that he visits the house of the complainant and requests her to tie the Rakhi band to him with the promise to protect her to the best of his ability for all times to come

In a first of its kind, the Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court just recently on 30 July, 2020 in a latest case titled Vikram Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh in Case No. – MCRC-23350-2020 released a person who was apprehended for outraging the modesty of a woman on bail. The unique condition that was imposed for releasing him on bail was that he visits the house of the complainant and requests her to tie the Rakhi band to him with the promise to protect her to the best of his ability for all times to come! This is what gave a lot of prominence to this case. The case was heard through video conferencing.

To start with, this notable judgment authored by Justice Rohit Arya of Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court sets the ball rolling by first and foremost observing that, This is the first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., for grant of bail filed on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 02/06/2020 in connection with crime No. 133/2020 registered at Police Station Bhatpachlana, District – Ujjain for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 354(A), 354, 323 and 506 of IPC.

To put things in perspective, it is then pointed out in this judgment that, As per the prosecution story, on 20/04/2020 at about 2 : 30 am, the applicant as a neighbor has entered the house of the complainant and caught hold of hand of the complainant attempting to outrage her modesty. Accordingly, case has been registered. Investigation is complete. Challan has been filed.

On the contrary, the judgment then mention the applicant's version stating that, Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. Investigation is complete. Challan has been filed. He is no more required for further custodial interrogation. The applicant is in custody since 02/06/2020. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the applicant had asked the husband of the complainant to return back the outstanding loan amount against him, which was advanced by the applicant during the lockdown period. The complainant's husband had taken exception thereto and as a sequel to the demand, filed the instant false case against the present applicant. Besides, the applicant is a married person and cannot think of entering the house of the neighbour to outrage the modesty of a women/complainant. The family is on the verge of starvation due to his jail incarceration. Further jail incarceration shall jeopardise the life of the family members. Due to prevailing Covid-19 situation, trial is not likely to conclude early in the near future. Under such circumstances, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail on such terms and conditions, Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.

As a corollary, what then ensues is stated thus: Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application supporting the order impugned. It is submitted that even if, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicant, certain stringent conditions are imposed.

Most significantly, it is then pointed out further in this judgment that, Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, without commenting upon the rival contention so advanced, but regard being had to the fact that the applicant has already suffered jail incarceration for more than two months, he is no more required for further custodial interrogation, therefore, he is held entitled for enlargement on bail. Consequently, the application of the applicant filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, on the condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and also comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C., with following further conditions:

(i) the applicant along with his wife shall visit the house of the complainant with Rakhi thread/band on 03 August, 2020 at 11:00 am with a box of sweets and request the complainant to tie the Rakhi band to him with the promise to protect her to the best of his ability for all times to come. He shall also tender Rs. 11,000/- (Rs. Eleven Thousand Only) to the complainant as a customary ritual usually offered by the brothers to sisters on such occasion and shall also seek her blessings. The applicant shall also tender Rs. 5,000/- to the son of the complainant-Vishal for purchase of clothes and sweets.

The applicant shall obtain photographs and receipts of payment made to the complainant and her son, and the same shall be filed through the counsel for placing the same on record of this case before this Registry.

The aforesaid deposit of amount shall not influence the pending trial, but is only for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

(ii) the applicant shall furnish a written undertaking with his complete residential details that he shall abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars and orders issued by the Government of India and the State Government as well as the local administration from time to time in the matter of maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc., to avoid proliferation of Novel Corona virus (COVID-19);

(iii) the applicant shall install Aarogya Sethu App (if not already installed) in his mobile phone;

(iv) the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence whatsoever in any manner or induce or threat any person acquainted with the facts of the case;

(v) the applicant shall cooperate during trial and will not seek unnecessary adjournments during trial;

(vi) the applicant shall not leave India or the area without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

(vii) the concerned jail authorities are directed that before releasing the applicant, the medical examination of the applicant be conducted through the jail doctor and if it is prima facie found that he is having any symptoms of COVID-19, then the consequential follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any further test required be undertaken immediately. If not, the applicant shall be released on bail in terms of the conditions imposed in this order and shall also be given pass or permit for movement to reach his place of residence;

Going ahead, it is then also pointed out in this judgment that, In the event of violation of any of the terms and conditions of the order by the applicant, the prosecution is at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail granted to the applicant. Learned Panel Lawyer is directed to send an e-copy of this order to all the concerned including the concerned Station House Officer of the police station for information and necessary action. Registry is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Court concerned for necessary compliance.

Finally and before concluding, it is then held in the last para that, It is made clear that this e-copy order be treated as Certified copy in terms of the advisories issued by the High Court from time to time.

To conclude, it may be very rightly recalled that earlier the Madhya Pradesh High Court had directed few accused to register themselves as COVID-19 Warriors and work in the COVID-19 Disaster Management, as per directions of the concerned District Magistrate, as a pre-condition for bail. Similarly there have been some other such unique cases also. This latest judgment by Justice Rohit Arya of Madhya Pradesh High Court of releasing an accused on bail on condition of offering the woman to tie him rakhi is certainly unique and gives an opportunity to the accused to reform himself on a very light punishment due to which it is rightly in the headlines also!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top