Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 11]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rakesh @ Akku Pandit Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 September, 2020

Author: Vishal Mishra

Bench: Vishal Mishra

                           1
               HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            CRA-3401-2020
        (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



Gwalior, Dated : 09.09.2020

      Mrs. Sangita Pachauri, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri Aditya Singh, learned Public Prosecutor, for the State.

      In the wake of unprecedented and uncertain situation due to

outbreak of the Novel Corona virus (COVID-19) and considering the

advisories issued by the Government of India, this application has been

heard and decided through video conferencing to maintain social

distancing. The parties are being represented by the respective counsels

through video conferencing, following the norms of social distancing/

physical distancing in letter and spirit.

      Present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

(hereinafter would be referred as "the Atrocities Act") against the

order dated 16.12.2019 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities Act)

Gwalior whereby the application of the appellant under Section 439

of Cr.P.C seeking bail has been rejected.

      Appellant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 227

of 2017 registered at Police Station Ghatigoan, District Gwalior for

the offence punishable under Sections 307, 302 and 34 & 30 of the

IPC, Sec. 30 of Arms Act and 3 (1) (r)(s), 3 (2) (V-A) of the

Atrocities Act.

      Counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that she is not
                            2
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            CRA-3401-2020
        (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



pressing the application for grant of bail on merits, rather, she has filed

an application for interim bail being I.A. No. 5146/2020 on the ground

of ailment of appellant's father. It is submitted that the father of the

appellant is about 76-77 years of age and mother of the appellant is

nearly 70-72 years of age. It is argued that the father of the appellant is

requiring total knee replacement as advised by the doctor and he is not

in a position even to move without any help of the assistant. It is

submitted that the brother of the appellant is a lunatic and is not in a

position to take care of his father and appellant's wife is a Government

Servant working as Aaganwadi Karyakarta and is living separately and

not residing with the family. There is nobody in the family except the

appellant who could have taken care of his father during this old age. It

is argued that during the COVID-19 pandemic scenario, there is

nobody in the family to take care of his old parents specially father and

mother and also the brother, who is a lunatic. She submits that the

application for interim bail may be considered and appellant be

released for a temporary period to enable him to make arrangements

for treatment of his father and also to make necessary arrangements for

the family members.

      This Court vide its order dated 31.08.2020 has directed to the

State authorities to call for the medical status report of the father of the

present appellant. In pursuance to the same, the report has been
                            3
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            CRA-3401-2020
        (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



submitted by the State counsel, wherein it is categorically mentioned

that the report dated 07.09.2020 has been submitted under the

signature of the Station House Officer, Police Station Janakganj,

District Gwalior, wherein he has pointed out that in pursuance to the

direction given by this Court he has categorically examined the family

status of the present appellant and also the medical condition of the

father of the appellant. He has got recorded the statements of the

neighbors- the independent persons and also has taken the opinion of

the doctor regarding the medical condition of Gopal Krishan Sharma,

who is the father of the appellant. The doctor in its prescription dated

05.09.2020 addressed to the in-charge of Police Station, Janakganj has

categorically mentioned that "this is to certified the patient Shri Gopal

Krishan Sharma 77/male is suffering from severe (grade-A)

osteoporosis of both knees, he has been advised TOR/TKR i.e. (total

knee replacement) surgery for his both knees (on the basis of X-ray

dated 05.09.2020). It is further mentioned that at present, the patient is

having gross difficulty in performing his activities of daily living

without any assistant." Even the report also shows that the brother of

the appellant is mentally unfit and mother of the appellant is also old

and aged person of 73 years. Under these circumstances, it is advisable

by the doctor to get the knee replacement of the father of the appellant

to the earliest as it is a chronic case of advanced osteoporosis.
                           4
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           CRA-3401-2020
       (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



      Taking into consideration of the overall facts and circumstances

of the case and after going through the report submitted by the doctor

as well as the other documents submitted by the Station House Officer,

Police Station, Janakganj, District Gwalior and coupled with the

present scenario of COVID-19, this Court deems it appropriate to

enlarge the appellant on bail on temporary basis for a period of 45 days

to enable him to get the treatment of his father done and also to make

necessary arrangements of helper/ assistant to take care of the family

members.

      Accordingly, I.A. No. 5146/2020 and the appeal is allowed.

The appellant is directed to be released for a period of 45 days (from

the date of his release) furnishing a surety bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.

Fifty thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to

the satisfaction of trial Court. The appellant shall submit written

undertaking that he will abide by all terms and conditions of the

different circulars, orders as well as guidelines issued by the Central

Government, State Government as well as Local Administration for

maintaining social distancing, hygiene etc to avoid Novel Corona Virus

(COVID -19) pandemic and he will have to install Arogya Setu App,

if not already installed. The appellant shall surrender before

concerning CJM, on completion of 45 days from the date of release

with the further direction to submit all the medical documents
                             5
               HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                             CRA-3401-2020
        (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)



regarding the treatment given to his father during the aforesaid

period and information to this effect shall be sent by the court

concerned to Registry of this court

       This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the

following conditions by the appellant:-

1.

The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The appellant 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The applicant shall mark his attendance before the concerned Police Station once every fortnight i.e. in the 1st and 3rd week of every month till conclusion of trial.

6

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3401-2020 (RAKESH @ AKKU PANDIT SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

8. The appellant will inform the concerned S.H.O. of concerned Police Station about his residential address in the said area and it would be the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of concerned police station as well as Superintendent of Police, concerned who shall inform the concerned SHO regarding the same.

In view of the COVID-19, jail authorities are directed that before releasing the appellant, medical examination of appellant shall be undertaken by the jail doctor and on prima facie, if it is found that he is having the symptoms of COVID-19, then consequential follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any test if required, be ensured, otherwise appellants shall be released immediately on bail and shall be given a pass or permit for movement to reach his place of residence.

E- copy of this order be provided to the appellant and E-copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance. It is made clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for practical purposes in respect of this order.


                                                      (Vishal Mishra)
LJ*/-                                                       Judge


             LOKENDRA
             JAIN
             2020.09.10
             18:42:53 -07'00'