Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hemant Uikey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2023
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 28th OF JUNE, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 20356 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
HEMANT UIKEY S/O LATE SHRI ATMARAM
UIKEY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
LABOUR CASTE DHIMAR RESIDENT OF SEWTI
POLICE STATION KIRNAPUR DISTRICT
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
... APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MANISH DATT - SENIOR COUNSEL WITH SHRI
ROHIT SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION BAIHAR DISTRICT
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI A.S. BAGHEL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This application coming on for admission this day, the Court
passed the following:
ORDER
Additional documents filed vide I.A. No.11821 of 2023 is taken on record.
2. This is the fifth application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.168 of 2021 registered at Police Station Baihar District Balaghat (M.P.) for the Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 6/28/2023 6:39:46 PM 2 offences under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 489E, 120B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The first and second applications were rejected on merits vide orders dated 06.08.2021 and dated 23.11.2021 passed in MCrC No.35443 of 2021 and MCrC No.49510 of 2021 respectively whereas third one was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 13.01.2023 passed in MCrC No.1630 of 2023. The fourth application was dismissed on 17.03.2023 passed in MCrC No.7630 of 2023.
4. This time the bail is pleaded mainly on the ground that the applicant is in custody since 27.06.2021 and similarly placed co-accused namely Sohanlal Bisen and Rahul Meshram have been released on bail vide common order dated 21.12.2022 passed in MCrC No.53103 of 2022 and MCrC No.47745 of 2022. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is also submitted that the applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court while considering his application for grant of bail.
5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent/State has opposed the application but fairly admits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
6. Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
7. The common order dated 21.12.2022 whereby co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail, is in the following terms :
4. These repeat applications have been filed on the ground that the applicants are in custody since 26.06.2021. The allegations made against them is for counterfeiting the currency. It is argued that the so said currency notes which are being recovered from the possession of the present applicants are the notes which are being prepared for children. The bail applications have been filed on the ground that the despite issuance of summons and warrants the witnesses are not turning up before the Court to depose. The Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 6/28/2023 6:39:46 PM 3 applicants are in custody since 26.06.2021. They are ready to abide by all terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering their bail applications. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail.
5. This Court vide order dated 25.11.2022 has directed as under-
"In pursuance to the order dated 18.11.2022, a letter has been produced before this Court written by the SHO, Police Station Baihar, District Balaghat addressed to the AG Office pointing out as under:
**mijksDr fo"k;kUrxZr fuosnu gS fd Fkkuk cSgj ftyk ckyk?kkV ds vijk/k dzek¡d 168@2021 /kkjk 489,] 489ch] 489lh] 489Mh] 489bZ] 120] 420 Hkknfo esa foospuk iw.kZ gksus ds i'ekr ekuuh; U;k;ky; esa vafre izfrosnu izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk] ftl ij ekg tqykbZ 2022 ls fopkj.k dh dk;Zokgh izkjEHk gks pqdh gSA bl nkSjku vfHk;kstu i{k ds lkf{k;ksa dks mifLFkfr gsrq ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds }kjk leu tkjh fd;s x;s gSAa ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds }kjk ftu vfHk;kstu lkf{k;ksa dks leu tkjh fd;s x;s Fks] os lHkh orZeku esa vU;= Fkkuksa ,oa ftyks esa inLFk gSa] foxr iapk;r ,oa uxjh; fudk; fuokZpu dk;ksaZ esa O;Lr jgus ds dkj.k lk{; gsrq mifLFkr ugh gks lds gSaA ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds }kjk vfHk;kstu lk{kh lmfu izeksn ckxjh ds lk{; gsrq fnukad 16@12@22 dks lk{; izLrqr djus ds fy;s leu tkjh fd;k x;k gSa] tks fd rkehy djk;k x;k gSAa ** From the aforesaid, it is clear that the witnesses could not be produced and the summons could not be served upon them owing to the fact that the police officials were busy in election duty and owing to transfer of police officials. It appears that owing to transfer, the police station remain vacant and no other officer was posted at the relevant point of time. There is no regard to the orders of this Court as well as the trial Court regarding service of summons or production of witnesses. In such circumstances, let the Superintendent of Police, Balaghat along with concerned SHO to remain personally present before this Court on the next date of hearing to explain the same.
List the matter on 02.12.2022.
A copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Balaghat for necessary compliance."
6. Despite the directions given by this Court the Superintendent of Police was not present and he has filed an application seeking exemption which was allowed on 09.12.2022 as the case was reported to be listed before the Trial Court on 16.12.2022. Again on 20.12.2022, it was argued that none of the witnesses are examined before the Trial Court, therefore a detailed order was passed which reads as under :
"It is informed that on 16.12.2022 none of the witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. It is seen from the records that on 25.11.2022 a detailed order was passed by this Court securing presence of Superintendent of Police, Balaghat as well as the concerning Station House Officer but subsequently, on behalf of Superintendent of Police, Balaghat an application seeking personal exemption was filed.Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 6/28/2023 6:39:46 PM 4
Assurance was given by the State counsel that the witnesses will be produced before the trial Court for examination, but despite of that none of the witnesses have been examined. The applicants are in custody since 26.06.2021. There is no explanation as to why the witnesses could not be kept present before the trial Court for examination.
Under these circumstances, let the Superintendent of Police, Balaghat as well as the Concerning Station House Officer to remain personally present before this Court to explain the same.
Call on 21.12.2022."
7. In pursuance to the same, the Superintendent of Police, District Balaghat is present before this Court. He submits his unconditional apology before this Court for his failure to produce the witnesses before the Trial Court. It is argued that all possible efforts will be made to produce the witnesses before the Trial Court. The order sheet of the Trial Court dated 16.12.2022 shows that the S.H.O. or the Investigating Officer could not serve the warrants, therefore, the Court has directed the service of bailable warrants through Superintendent of Police, District Balaghat. It is pointed out by the Superintendent of Police that notices have been issued to the concerning SHO to take the matter on top priority. This case pertains to counterfeiting of currency notes which is not disputed by either side but it is argued by the counsel for the applicants that on the notes it is written Children Bank.
8. The matter has already been considered and dealt with by this Court on merits which was rejected on earlier occasion but looking to the fact that the applicants are in custody since 26.06.2021 and there is virtually no progress in the trial. The police authorities are not in a position to produce the witnesses before the Trial Court and the same is causing delay in trial just because of the lapses of the police authorities. Keeping the applicants in custody without their being any progress in the trial because of lapses on the part of the police authorities amounts to pre-trial detention of the applicant. Although statement is made before this Court by the Superintendent of Police, District Balaghat that all possible efforts will be made to keep the witnesses present before this Court on the next date of hearing but the fact remains that he was well aware of the fact that this Court has already raised a question on 25.11.2022 but despite of the same, no efforts which could have been shown to be made by the police authorities to produce the witnesses before the Court even on 16.12.2022 they were not even in a position to keep any witnesses till date even not even a single witness has been examined before the Trial Court. Under these circumstances this Court is left with no other options except to allow these applications."
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 6/28/2023 6:39:46 PM 58. Considering overall circumstances of the case and the fact that the case of the applicant is not distinguishable from co-accused persons, but without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court now deems it appropriate to allow this application. Accordingly, the application is allowed subject to verification of the fact that the applicant is the first offender. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing surety bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the following conditions:-
(i) He is directed to mark his presence before the concerning police station in first week of every month till the conclusion of the trial.
(ii) He will surrender his passport, if any, to the police authorities and will not leave the District without prior intimation to the SHO of the concerning Police Station.
(iii) He will not indulge in any other illegal activities and in the event of registration of any criminal case against him, the bail granted by this Court shall stand cancelled automatically.
(iv) He shall comply with the conditions as enumerated under Section 437(3) of CrPC.
9. This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in case of bail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become ineffective and cancelled without reference to this Bench.
10. The application stands allowed in above terms.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE vinod Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 6/28/2023 6:39:46 PM