Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jitendra Dhakad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 May, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 MP 1680
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 Cr.A. No.3024/2020
(Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. )
Gwalior Bench
Dated :26/05/2020
Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Anoop Nigam, learned PL for respondent/State.
Matter is heard through Video Conferencing.
The appellant has filed this appeal under Section 14-A of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 11/05/2020 passed by trial Court; whereby, application of appellant preferred under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Appellant has been arrested on 4/3/2020 by Police Station Kailarash, District Morena in connection with Crime No. 485/2019 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n), 506, 342, 34 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (w) (ii) & 3 (2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that false case has been registered against him and he is facing confinement since 4/3/2020. It is further submitted that it is a matter of consent because prosecutrix is major and both intended to marry but somehow could not and therefore, just to exert pressure, false case has been registered. Initially, FIR and statement under Section Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. ) 161 Cr.P.C. of prosecutrix refers the role of two persons including appellant but later on in statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., many family members of the appellant were added and that shows the nature of allegations. If on false pretext of marriage, proximity is developed then, same does not amount to rape. Learned counsel for the appellant referred the judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., AIR 2019 SC 327. Looking to the prevailing condition of COVID- 19, he seeks bail on sympathetic grounds also. He undertakes to cooperate in trial and further undertakes not to be a source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant party in any manner. 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. Further looking to the situation of pandemic, he intends to serve the Nation by contributing his part by installing Arogya Setu App and by depositing Rs. 5,000/- in PMCARES Fund.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer made by the appellant and prayed for dismissal of the criminal appeal. Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. ) Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them.
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 Level 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 under trial 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 maximum.
It is made clear that we leave it open for the High Powered Committee to determine the category of Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. ) 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."
After considering the rival submissions as well as considering the peculiar fact situation, wherein, we are facing wrath of pandemic COVID-19, this Court is of the considered opinion that appellant deserves to be released on bail.
As this Court is not in a position to consider the facts of the case in detail, however, considering the fact that in view of Covid-19 pandemic, but without commenting on the merits of the case, while setting aside the order dated 11/5/2020 passed by trial Court, appeal is allowed. It is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court and that he will have to install Arogya Setu App, if not already installed.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the jail authorities are directed that before releasing the appellant, his preliminary Corona Virus test shall be conducted and if he is found negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 5 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. ) for sending the appellant to his house, and if he is found positive then the appellant shall be immediately sent to concerned hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. If the appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 sent him to the same jail from where he was released.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellants :-
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 Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 6 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad 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 appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not be a source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant party in any manner and appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;
7. The appellant shall deposit Rs.5,000/- in PM CARES Fund having Account Number : 2121PM20202, IFSC Code:
SBIN0000691, SWIFT Code : SBININBB104, Name of Bank & Branch : State Bank of India, New Delhi Main Branch within one and half month.
8. The appellant 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.
Appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 7 Cr.A. No.3024/2020 (Jitendra Dhakad Vs. State of M.P. ) 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.
(Anand Pathak) Judge jps/-
Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 26/05/2020 17:25:51