Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lajjaram Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 June, 2020
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.10015/2020
(Lajjaram Sharma Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated:-09/06/2020
Shri B.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Ravindra Singh Kushwah, learned Deputy Advocate
General for the respondent/State.
Matter is heard through video conferencing.
I.A. No.2362/2020, an application under Section 301(2) of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the complainant for assisting the State Counsel is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.
Accordingly, Shri A.R. Shivhare, learned counsel and his associates are permitted to assist the State Counsel.
Consequently, I.A. No.2362/2020 stands disposed of. The applicant has filed this second bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 24.06.2019 by Police Station Baagchini Distt. Morena (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.140/2019 registered for offence under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 34 of IPC and added Sections 302, 201, 120-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant- Lajjaram Sharma that the applicant has not committed any offence. Applicant is aged around 80 years and he is the father-in-law of the deceased. He has falsely been implicated in this case. Applicant is in custody since 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.10015/2020 (Lajjaram Sharma Vs. State of M.P.) 24/06/2019, i.e. around one year. Earlier bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 22/01/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.51305/2019 with liberty to the applicant to file fresh application after recording of evidence of some prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, the case was listed for two times wherein on the second occasion, the case was listed for 26/03/2020, but due to lock down, no prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. It is further submitted that as present COVID-19 condition is beyond control, therefore there is no possibility of examining any prosecution witnesses in the near future. Hence prays for grant of regular bail or interim bail for a period of 60 days. He further undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions of guidance, circulars and directions issued by Central Government, State Government as well as Local Administration regarding measures in respect of COVID-19 Pandemic and maintain hygiene in the vicinity while keeping physical distancing.
Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer and have submitted that earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits. Thereafter, there is no changed circumstance under which present bail application could be considered. It is also submitted that ante mortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Hence, prayed to 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.10015/2020 (Lajjaram Sharma Vs. State of M.P.) reject the bail application of the applicant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the case diary.
It is apparent from the record available that earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits and liberty was granted to file fresh application after recording of evidence of some prosecution witnesses but due to the present COVID-19 condition, no prosecution witness has been examined. Therefore, looking to the age of the present applicant, which is around 80 years, facts and circumstances of the present case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, prayer for interim bail is allowed and it is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail for a temporary period of 60 days from the date of his release on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. The applicant shall surrender before the trial Court immediately after completion of 60 days. The intimation regarding surrender of the applicant be furnished to this Court. In case of failure to comply the order, this bail order shall automatically stand cancelled.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the jail authorities are directed that before releasing the applicant, his Corona Virus test shall be conducted and if it is found negative, then the concerned local 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.10015/2020 (Lajjaram Sharma Vs. State of M.P.) administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his house, and if his test is found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. If the applicant is fit for release and if he is in a position to make his personal arrangements, then he shall be released only after taking due travel permission from local administration. After release, 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 combating the 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.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1.The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending 5 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.10015/2020 (Lajjaram Sharma Vs. State of M.P.) inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not move in the vicinity of complainant party and applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and
7. The applicant will inform the SHO 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 for information.
This application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. stands disposed of in above terms.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible for the office of this Court.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava) Judge Shubhankar* SHUBHANKAR MISHRA 2020.06.09 18:09:05 +05'30'