Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravi @ Ravikant Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 August, 2020
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 Cr.A.No. 4317/2020
(Ravi alias Ravikant Dubey Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)
Gwalior Bench:
Dated :26/08/2020
Shri Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri VPS Tomar, learned PL for the respondent/State.
Heard the counsel for the parties through Video Conferencing. Appellant has filed this criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 13/07/2020 passed by Special Judge (Attrocities), District-Datia, whereby bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant has been dismissed by the trial Court.
Appellant is apprehending his arrest for the offence registered at Crime No.2/2020, at Police Station AJAK, District Datia, punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506 of IPC of IPC and Section 3(1)(da) and (gha) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is apprehending his arrest on the basis of offence registered against him as referred above. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that he is working at District Registrar Office, District Datia where the complainant also works in the same premises. Due to professional rivalry, dispute erupted between the parties, therefore, false case has been registered. It is further submitted that alleged incident is dated 13/7/2020 whereas, complaint HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 Cr.A.No. 4317/2020 (Ravi alias Ravikant Dubey Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) has been made on 25th July, 2020 i.e. with a delay of 12 days. In the present case where the complainant is also working in Registrar Office and well aware with the legal proceedings, delay of 12 days assumes important. No injuries have been sustained by complainant to suggest any occasion of event. He relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court Atendra Singh Rawat Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2019 (2) MPLJ (Cri) 481. Confinement would bring social disrepute and professional inconvenience. He undertakes not to be source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant party in any manner and further undertakes to cooperate in investigation/trial. He further undertakes to serve the national cause by making installing Arogya Setu App. On these grounds, prayer for anticipatory bail is made out.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and prayed for the dismissal of the same.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary online.
Considering the submissions and looking to the COVID-19 situation and considering the decision of Apex Court in the matter of Atendra Singh Rawat (supra), this Court is inclined to allow the application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. It is directed that appellant shall be released on bail in case of his arrest on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 Cr.A.No. 4317/2020 (Ravi alias Ravikant Dubey Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority/Investigating Officer.
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/her 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 and would not be a source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant party in any manner;
5. The 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. Appellant shall mark his appearance before the concerned police station every Sunday from 10.30 am to 2.30 pm for investigation purpose till filing of charge-sheet.
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/-
JAI Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRAKASH PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf179cec865 c7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb05b9522a, cn=JAI SOLANKI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2020.08.27 11:41:22 +05'30'