Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puspendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 September, 2020
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 M.Cr.C.No.30175/2020
(Pushpendra Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)
Gwalior Bench: Dated 14/09/2020
Shri Ramsevak Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri APS Tomar, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
Matter is heard through Video Conferencing. The applicant has filed this second bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 3.9.2019 by Police Station Dinara, District Shivpuri, in connection with Crime No.192/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 344, 366, 376, 373, 370(Ka), 376(3), 376 (2)(N), 34 of IPC and Sections 3 /4, 4/5 of the POCSO Act. First application has been dismissed as withdrawn.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that he is suffering confinement since 3.9.2019. It is further submitted that on 16/3/2020, statement of prosecutrix and her parents have been partially completed, therefore, chance of tampering with the evidence/witness is remote. In fact, applicant himself is victim of circumstances rather than perpetrator of it. Prosecutrix lived with applicant for two months in total and she did not raise any alarm. It is further submitted that his case is identical vis-a-vis case of Raghvendra Singh Parmar @ King Raja who has been granted benefit of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. He undertakes to cooperate in trial and would not be a source of HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C.No.30175/2020 (Pushpendra Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) embarrassment/harassment to the complainant party in any manner. He further undertakes to perform community service and to serve national cause by contributing his part of contribution in nation building. On these premises, he prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of the bail application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as fact situation of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is allowed. It is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) along 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 applicant, his preliminary Corona Virus test shall be conducted and if he is found negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his house, and if he is HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 M.Cr.C.No.30175/2020 (Pushpendra Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerned 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 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 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 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 M.Cr.C.No.30175/2020 (Pushpendra Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. Applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during trial and applicant will not move in the vicinity of complainant party;
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and
7. Applicant would not be a source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant party in any manner and would not move in their vicinity;
8. 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.
Application stands allowed and disposed of. 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 PRAKASH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf1 SOLANKI 79cec865c7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb05b9 522a, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2020.09.15 10:48:22 +05'30'