Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sagaribai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 June, 2021
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
-1- MCRC No.25913/2021
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT INDORE
MCRC NO.25913/2021
Sagarbai w/o Nandu@Nandram Bhil vs. State of M.P
07.06.2021: (INDORE):
Shri Siddharth Jain, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Prateek Patwardhan, learned PL for the State. Heard through video conferencing.
This is first application filed u/s 439 Cr.P.C seeking bail in connection with Crime No.101/2020 registered at police station Rajod, district Dhar for the offence punishable u/s 302, 307, 323, 294, 506, 147, 148 & 149 IPC and u/s 25(1-b)(b) of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the applicant is similar to that of co-accused Geetabai who has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.36382/2020.
The order dated 16.10.2020 passed in MCRC No.36382/2020 is reproduced below:
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 36382 of 2020 (Geetabai Vs. State of MP) Indore, Dated: 16/10/2020 Shri Sidharth Jain learned counsel for applicant. Shri Harshawardhan Sharma learned counsel for State. Heard through video conferencing.
This is an application made by the applicant (accused) under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail during trial.
Notice of this application was served on the State counsel. Case diary as per the direction of this Court has been produced and it has been perused.
The applicant is facing trial for offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 294, 506, 147, 148, 149 of IPC & 25 B of Arms Act registered with Police Station Rajod District Dhar in Crime no. 101/2020.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a free-fight between both the parties had taken place on account of issue of possession of land. He further submits that in that fight applicant had also received injury and applicant party had lodged the FIR against the complainant party prior in point of time. He further submits that main allegation of causing injury by means of sword, Falia and axe to the deceased Kailash is as against Nandu, Bhuralal and Galia and the allegation against the present applicant is that he had caused injury by means of stick to Rankibai. He further submits that there is no query report or x-ray report in respect of nature of injury which was received by Rankibai. He also submits that in the incident entire family of applicant has been roped in and that the applicant is an aged lady of more than 60 years of age and there was also no common intention to cause death as the incident had taken place suddenly. He also submits -2- MCRC No.25913/2021 that the applicant is in custody since 17/6/2020 and challan has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take time.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application for grant of bail and has referred to the material from case diary as also from the cross case diary. He has not disputed that there is no query report or x-ray report available in the case diary in respect of injury received by Rankibai.
On perusal of the case diary and considering the circumstances of the case, I find prima facie force in the submissions made by the counsel for applicant. Hence I am of the considered view that the application for grant of bail deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed.
The applicant is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for her appearance as and when directed.
The applicant will attend each hearing of her trial before the Trial Court out of which this bail arises. Any default in attendance in Court would result in cancellation of the bail granted by this Court.
I have perused the case diary.
Prima facie, the allegations are similar against the present applicant also and there was no common intention to commit murder. The dispute arose regarding possession of land. The applicant has no criminal antecedents.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on the ground of parity with the case of co-accused Geetabai, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Before releasing the applicant from the custody the jail authorities are directed to medically examine her in order to rule out the possibility of COVID-19 infections and shall comply with the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition No. 1/2020.
C.c as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
Digitally signed by HARI KUMAR C
hk/ G NAIR
Date: 2021.06.07 17:27:39 +05'30'