Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arvind vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 November, 2020
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT GWALIOR
M.Cr.C. No.37573/2020
( Arvind Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh )
(1)
Gwalior, dated : 09.11.2020
Shri Vinod Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Alok Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Shri Vivek Kumar Mishra, Advocate for the complainant. In pursuance of the directions issued by the Apex Court and guidelines issued by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak, the matter was taken up through video conferencing while adhering to the norms of social distancing prescribed by the Government.
I.A. No.18200/2020, an application filed u/S. 301(2) Cr.P.C. is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.
Learned counsel for the complainant is permitted to assist the Panel Lawyer.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Case diary perused.
The applicant has filed this first application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 17.07.2020 by Police Station - Mihona, District Bhind in connection with Crime No.60/2020 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 302, 336, 452, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act and added Sections of 395 and 397 of IPC.
The allegation against the applicant and other co-accused persons, in short, is that on 21.6.2020, the complainant lodged a HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.37573/2020 ( Arvind Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh ) (2) report to the effect that at about 8 A.M. she heard the loud noise from out side the house. She shut the doors of the house. At that time, present applicant, co-accused Preetam, Ranveer, Shyam, Jagesh and Rinku armed with stones came at the doors of the house and started pelting stones, which hit Poonum, Ramveer and Guddu. Thereafter all of them went on the terrace armed with lathis. Rinku armed with Katta came on the terrace. Complainant's husband Ramveer took out 12 bore gun belonging to her father-in-law and fired which hit Jagesh, who died on the spot. Present applicant and co-accused persons started beating the complainant with Kulhadi, Danda etc. due to which she received injuries. At that time, Rinku fired which hit Ramveer. He also died on the spot. All of them ran away from the spot. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has been registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in custody since 17.07.2020. Charge sheet has been filed. No further custodial is required in the case. Cross case at Crime No.59/2020 has also been registered against the complainant. The applicant was not present on the spot at the time of incident. Counsel for the applicant submits that in view of COVID-19, outbreak detention of applicant in already congested prisons may be detrimental. Disposal of the matter will take long time. The applicant is a permanent resident of District HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.37573/2020 ( Arvind Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh ) (3) Bhind and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Under these grounds, applicant prays for grant of bail.
On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the application by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. It is further submitted that the applicant is actively involved in the incident and he had entered the house and climbed the terrace of the house of the complainant alongwith other co-accused persons with common intention. Custody period is less. On such grounds, prayer for dismissal of the bail application is made.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.
(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge SP SANJEEV KUMAR PHANSE 2020.11.10 09:18:32 +05'30'