‘Tendency Has Developed To Make Rape Allegation With Certain Motives Against Husband or Lover’: Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Cong MLA
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur recently granted anticipatory bail to Congress MLA Umang Singh Shingar in a rape case.Justice Sanjay Dwivedi observed that "Perusal of case diary, nature of allegations and submissions of counsel for both the parties, clearly reveal that at the time of developing physical relation prosecutrix was married. She is mentally sound, educated and is...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur recently granted anticipatory bail to Congress MLA Umang Singh Shingar in a rape case.
Justice Sanjay Dwivedi observed that
"Perusal of case diary, nature of allegations and submissions of counsel for both the parties, clearly reveal that at the time of developing physical relation prosecutrix was married. She is mentally sound, educated and is also in politics. Both the parties have filed material against each other to substantiate that they are not of good character. The legal position and the factual aspect of the case prima facie indicates that it is not a case of any forceful compulsion by the applicant to the prosecutrix to surrender before him and develop physical relation."
Shingar apprehended his arrest in connection with a case registered at Police Station Naogaon District Dhar for offences punishable under Section 294 (Obscene acts and songs), 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 376(2)(N) (Rape), 377 (Unnatural Offences), 498-A (Husband or relatives of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) of IPC, filed the anticipatory bail application.
Senior Advocate Manish Datt, representing the MLA, submitted that the applicant and prosecutrix are known to each other and have been in a relationship.
"From the contents of FIR, it is clear that prosecutrix has admitted the fact that applicant is her husband and she met with him in a public gathering, thereafter they came near to each other," Datt submitted.
The allegations levelled against the applicant are that he despite the prosecutrix's objection and refusal, used to commit rape and physically assaulted her.
However, Datt contended that considering the contents of the FIR including the fact that the prosecutrix herself had admitted that Shingar is her husband and they entered into the marriage, and developed a physical relationship, the case does not fall within the definition of rape.
The allegations of unnatural sex and harassment are false as the "prosecutrix is demanding a share in the property of the applicant", Shingar's counsel claimed.
Advocate Alok Agnihotri, representing the State, opposed the bail plea and submitted that an allegation of commission of unnatural sex is made against the applicant, which is a non-bailable offence., He also submitted that the investigation is ongoing and at this stage, the interrogation of the applicant is required.
The counsel representing the prosecutrix argued that as per Section 496 of IPC, applicant cannot enter into the marriage with her because he was already married. It was further submitted that the police are yet interrogate the accused and collect the material evidence
Observing that the matter prima facie does not appear to be a case of any forceful compulsion, Justice Dwivedi said:
"Considering the present scenario in which tendency has been developed to make allegation of rape and also of unnatural sex with certain motives against the husband or a person with whom girl has been in love affair, this Court is not expressing any opinion about character of any of the parties i.e applicant and prosecutrix".
Therefore, the court, after considering the facts and circumstances, granted anticipatory bail to the applicant without commenting upon the merits of the case.
"It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer/Arresting Officer of the Police Station concerned," the court said
Case Title: Umang Singh Shingar v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 42