Ajmer Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 September, 2019

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ajmer Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 September, 2019

This is first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant, who is in custody since 06/08/2019 in connection with Crime No.344/2019 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District-Shivpuri for the offence punishable under Sections 343, 376, 506 and 34 of IPC.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that he is in confinement since 06/08/2019 on false pretext. No allegation is attributable over the applicant in respect of offence under Section 376 of IPC and that is attributable only over Rakesh Yadav. The story as reflected in FIR in respect of present applicant indicate improbable events. Confinement since 06/08/2019 amounts to pre trial detention. Charge-sheet has already been filed. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial and would make himself available as and when required and he would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant/ prosecutrix in any manner. He further undertakes to do some community service. Under these circumstances, he prayed for grant of bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent-state opposed the prayer and prayed for its dismissal.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C. No.38375/2019 (Ajmer Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the fact that confinement amounts to pretrial detention, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his regular appearance before the trial Court concerned on the dates fixed by the Court during the trial.

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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be.

4. The applicant will not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The applicant would not move in the vicinity of the complainant/ prosecutrix and would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment, threat to the prosecutrix in any manner.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 M.Cr.C. No.38375/2019 (Ajmer Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P.) As per the undertaking given by learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, it is hereby directed that applicant shall plant 5 saplings (either fruit bearing trees or Neem and Peepal) alongwith tree guards or has to make arrangement for fencing for protection of the trees because it is the duty of the applicant not only to plant the saplings but also to nurture them. " o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gS A" He shall plant saplings/ trees preferably of 6-8 ft., so that they would grow into full fledged trees at an early time. For ensuring the compliance, he shall have to submit all the photographs of plantation of trees/ saplings before the concerned trial Court alongwith a report within 30 days from the date of release of the applicant. The report shall be submitted by the applicant before the trial Court concerned on 1st of every month.

It is the duty of the trial Court to monitor the progress of the trees because human existence is at stake because of the environmental degradation and Court cannot put a blind fold over any casualness shown by the applicant regarding compliance. Therefore, trial Court is directed to submit a report regarding progress of the trees and the compliance made by the applicant by placing a short report before this Court every quarterly (every three months), which shall be placed under the caption "Direction" before this Court. Any default shall disentitle the applicant from benefit of bail.

The applicant is directed to plant these saplings/ trees in his HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 M.Cr.C. No.38375/2019 (Ajmer Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P.) vicinity, or at the place of his choice, if he intends to protect the trees on his own cost by providing tree guards or fencing, for which applicant shall have to bear necessary expenses for plantation of the trees and their measures for safeguard.

This direction is made by this Court as a test case to address the Anatomy of Violence and Evil by process of Creation and a step towards Alignment with Nature. The natural instinct of compassion, service, love and mercy needs to be rekindled for human existence as they are innately engrained attributes of human existence.

"It is not the question of Plantation of a Tree but the Germination of a Thought."

Certified copy as per rules.


                                                       (Anand Pathak)
vc                                                        Judge
     VARSHA
     CHATURVEDI
     2019.09.18
     10:22:32 -07'00'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court