Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj Kumar Kaushal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 July, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-33164-2021
Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP
Through Video Conferencing
Gwalior, Dated : 07-07-2021
Shri Prakash Braru, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri Manish Nayak, Counsel for the State.
Shri Pradeep Katare, Counsel for the complainant.
Case diary is available.
This second application under Section 439 of CrPC has been
filed for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 22.10.2020 in connection
with Crime No.493/2020 registered by Police Station Dehat District
Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 of
IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that after the
rejection of bail application of the co-accused Gomti Bai, she has
been granted bail by the Supreme Court by order dated 22.06.2021
passed in Cr.A. No.531/2021. Copy of the order passed by the
Supreme Court has been placed on record, in which it has been held
that co-accused Gomti Bai is being granted bail in view of the
custody period and the allegation made in the FIR. It is submitted by
the counsel for the applicant that so far as the applicant is concerned,
undisputedly he is the husband, but except the bald statement that he
too was harassing and beating the deceased, there are no specific
2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-33164-2021
Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP
allegations of harassment and beating by the applicant. It is further
submitted that in the statement of the witnesses, they have
specifically alleged against the other co-accused persons by pointing
out the cruel behaviour on their part, but there is no such specific
allegation against the applicant. Even otherwise, after getting the
appointment in the year 2017, the applicant along with his wife was
residing separately in Morena up to the year 2019 and there is no
allegation that during this period, the deceased was ever harassed and
maltreated by the applicant. It is further submitted that so far as the
last allegation of harassment is concerned, according to that also, it is
alleged that on the birth day of the child of the deceased, parents of
the deceased had come to the matrimonial home of the deceased and
it was taunted by the accused persons that the parents of the deceased
has only given a cycle and they have not given the clothes. It is
further submitted that the applicant is in jail from 22.10.2020 and the
first application was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated
25.03.2021. The Trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State as well as the complainant. It is submitted that since the applicant is the husband of the deceased, therefore, he 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-33164-2021 Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP cannot run away from his liability to keep his wife with full dignity and pride.
Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties through video conferencing.
The Supreme Court by order dated 23-3-2020 passed in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 has directed all the States to constitute a High Powered Committee to consider the release of prisoners in order to decongest the prisons. The Supreme Court has observed as under :
"The issue of overcrowding of prisons is a matter of serious concern particularly in the present context of the pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID - 19).
Having regard to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it has become imperative to ensure that the spread of the Corona Virus within the prisons is controlled. We direct that each State/Union Territory shall constitute a High Powered Committee comprising of (i) Chairman of the State Legal Services Committee, (ii) the Principal Secretary (Home/Prison) by whatever designation is known as, (ii) Director General of Prison(s), to determine which class of prisoners can be released on parole or an interim bail for such period as may be thought appropriate. For instance, the State/Union Territory could consider the release of prisoners who have been convicted or are undertrial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or less, with or without fine and the prisoner has been convicted for a lesser number of years than the 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-33164-2021 Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP maximum.
It is made clear that we leave it open for the High Powered Committee to determine the category of prisoners who should be released as aforesaid, depending upon the nature of offence, the number of years to which he or she has been sentenced or the severity of the offence with which he/she is charged with and is facing trial or any other relevant factor, which the Committee may consider appropriate."
Considering the allegations made against the applicant as well as considering the period of detention and in view of second wave of Covid19 pandemic, it is also necessary to decongest the jail, and without commenting on the merits of the case, it is directed that the applicant be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or C.J.M. or Remand Magistrate (Whosoever is available). The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking that he shall follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration (General or Specific) from time to time for combating Covid19.
The Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS by order dated 7-4-2020 has directed as under :
In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to direct that Union of India shall ensure that all the prisoners having been released by the States/Union Territories are not left 5 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-33164-2021 Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP stranded and they are provided transportation to reach their homes or given the option to stay in temporary shelter homes for the period of lockdown.
For this purpose, the Union of India may issue appropriate directions under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 or any other law for the time being in force. We further direct that the States/Union Territories shall ensure through Directors General of Police to provide safe transit to the prisoners who have been released so that they may reach their homes. They shall also be given an option for staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of lockdown.
Accordingly, it is directed that before releasing the applicant, the jail authorities shall get the applicant examined by a competent Doctor and if the Doctor is of the opinion that his Corona Virus test is necessary, then the same shall be conducted.
If the applicant is not found suspected of Covid19 infection or if his test report is negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his house as per the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS (Supra), and if he is found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. The applicant is further directed to strictly follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration for 6 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-33164-2021 Manoj Kumar Kaushal Vs. State of MP combating Covid19. If it is found that the applicant has violated any of the instructions (whether general or specific) issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration, then this order shall automatically lose its effect, and the Local Administration/Police Authorities shall immediately take him in custody and would send him to the same jail from where he was released. The applicant is further directed to supply a copy of this bail order to the police station having jurisdiction over his place of residence.
The other conditions of Section 437, 439 Cr.P.C. shall remain the same.
This order shall remain in force, till the conclusion of Trial. In case of bail jump, or violation of any of the condition(s) mentioned above, this order shall automatically lose its effect.
With aforesaid observations, this application is Allowed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Abhi ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI 2021.07.07 20:41:18 +05'30'