Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Kumar Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 August, 2020
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT GWALIOR
M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020
(Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. )
(1)
Gwalior, dated :13/08/2020
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the
applicant.
Shri Kamlesh Kori, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-
state.
In pursuance of the directions issued by the Apex Court and guidelines issued by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak, the matter was taken up through video conferencing while adhering to the norms of social distancing prescribed by the Government.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this second application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Earlier first bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 18/02/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 4186/2020.
The applicant was arrested on 06/10/2019 by Police Station Ron District Bhind (M.P.), in connection with Crime No. 201/2019 registered in relation to the offence punishable under sections 379, 3/181, 39/192, 66/192, 56/192 and 146/196 of the IPC. Thereafter, he has been released on parole.
Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that he along with other co-accused persons were found involved in illegal HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020 (Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. ) (2) transportation of sand from Chambal river and also taking the trucks filled with sand towards Uttar Pradesh with the aid of some other co- accused persons, who were seated in a Bolero vehicle and they were piloting the carrier trucks containing sand and guiding their drivers including applicant to avoid police checkup points for facilitating to cross Uttar Pradesh. On the aforesaid basis, crime has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is a driver of the truck and has been falsely implicated in the matter. He is in custody since 06/10/2019. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. Offences are triable by JMFC. Attention has also been invited to the guidelines issued to all the States and Union Territories by the Apex Court for de-congesting the prisons in suo motu W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 (IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS) to consider release of prisoners who have been convicted or are under trial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or less by constituting a High Powered Committee. Applicant is a permanent resident of Village Bahadurpur Police Station Sefai District Etawah (U.P.). Earlier co-accused Budh Singh Baghel has already been released on bail vide order dated 23/07/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 18164/2020 by this Court. There is no likelihood of his absconsion of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Due to HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020 (Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. ) (3) COVID-19, trial is held up and there is no possibility of completion of trial in near future. On these grounds, he may be released on bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the application and it is submitted that applicant was on interim bail on the ground of COVID-19 granted by the Trial Court vide order dated 03/03/2020 for a period of 45 days. Again interim bail was extended vide order dated 04/05/2020 for a period of 45 days and date of appearance of the applicant was fixed for 29/06/2020. Thereafter, vide order dated 27/06/2020, Trial court looking to the cases of COVID,19 further extended interim bail till 24/09/2020. It is submitted that since the applicant is already on interim bail, therefore, present application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. It is further submitted that applicant fully knew that truck contained illegal sand, therefore, he facilitated the commissioning of crime. On such counts, he prays for rejection of bail.
In identical situation the Apex Court in the case of Kanak Sinh, Mohan Sinh Mangrola Vs State of Gurjat 2006 (9) SCC 540 has passed the following orders :
"3. This appeal is directed against the order of the High Court passed on 11-5-2005 rejecting the bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 CrPC mainly on the question of non maintainability of the application. According to the High Court the petition under Section 439 CrPC is not maintainable as the petitioner was not in custody.
4. From the bail application filed on 19-4-2005 by the appellant under Section 439 CrPC, it clearly HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020 (Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. ) (4) appears that on that day the appellant was in custody as he was on interim bail for 15 days from 13-4-2005 and his application could have been considered on merits instead of dismissing the same on the ground of non-maintainability.
5. In the view that we have taken, the impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court to consider the matter afresh on merits. The application filed by the appellant under Section 439 CrPC is now restored before the High Court and shall be disposed of on merits. The appellant is directed to appear before the High Court on 21-4-2006. The appellant is granted bail till 21-4-2006.
6. With the aforesaid direction this appeal is allowed."
Taking into consideration the case of Kanak Sinh (Supra), present application is maintainable in as much the applicant was in custody since 06/10/2019. Thereafter, due to COVID-19, he has been released on temporary bail. However, application requires consideration on merits. Hence, objection taken by the Panel Lawyer is over ruled.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant volunteered to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000 (Rs. Five Thousand Only) in Prime Minister Citizen Assistance and relief in Emergency Situation Fund (PM Cares Fund).
However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020 (Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. ) (5) and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with a local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. The applicant shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000/- (Rs.
Five Thousand Only) in Prime Minister Citizen Assistance and relief in Emergency Situation Fund (PM Cares Fund). The applicant shall submit an attested photocopy of the receipt before the concerning Court, for placing the same on record of this case.
2. The applicant shall install Aarogya Setu App (if not already HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.26473/2020 (Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs The State of M.P. ) (6) installed) in his mobile phone.
3. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
4. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
5. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
6. The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.
7. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
8. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Learned Panel Lawyer is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.
(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge Prachi* PRACHI MISHRA 2020.08.13 18:10:46 +05'30'