Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay Kaurav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 April, 2022
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
Bench: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 3493 of 2022
(SANJAY KAURAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Gwalior, Dated 26.04.2022
Shri Brajesh Kumar Tyagi, Advocate, for the appellant.
Shri Anil Shukla, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Shri Ratan Nigam, learned counsel for the complainant. Present Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 09.03.2022 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Gwalior, whereby the application of the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail has been rejected.
Appellant is in custody since 05.03.2022 for the alleged offence registered at Crime No.22/2022 at Police Station Panihar District, Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 354-A, 342, 147, 148, 323, 294, 506, 307, 120-B of IPC and Sections 3(1)(A), 3(1)(R), 3(1)(S), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(W)(I), 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the SC & ST Act").
In brief, the prosecution case is that on 23.02.2022 prosecutrix a married lady aged about 33 years resident of village Barai along 2 with her mother-in-law presented a written complaint against accused Sarnam Kaurav, Dhammo Kaurav, Bhura Kaurav, Gautam Kamriya, Sanjay Kaurav and Vivek Sharma that in the morning between 10.30 to 11 A.M., her husband called her to bring scooty at Panchayat Bhawan. As soon as she reached Panchayat Bhawan, from the hall of Panchayat Bhawan she heard the noise of crying. She enquired nearby person, who is crying. Somebody told her that "vk'kk ljuke ds yksx rqEgkjs ifr 'k'khdkar dh ekjihV dj jgs gS^^ She tried to open the gate. When the gate was opened, inside the room accused Asha, Dhamo, Bhura, Gautam, Sanjay Vivek and Sarnam Singh having danda and lathi and butt of iron gun,were assaulting her husband Shashikant, due to which, her husband got injury. Everybody was abusing filthy languages of caste and saying that " vkSj vkj-Vh-vkbZ yxkvksA " When she intervened, they with the bad intention committed marpeet with her and they urinate in the mouth of her husband. When she cried, every one said that today he is surviving, in next time if he will file R.T.I. they will kill him. She brought her husband to JA Hospital, Gwalior, where husband was treated. On her report offence under Sections 354(ka), 342, 147, 148, 323, 294, 506 of IPC and 3(1)(ka), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)B-a, 3(1)w(I) of S.C. S.T. Act was registered at Police Station Panihar, District Gwalior. Four fractures were found on the body of husband of 3 prosecutrix Shashikant. Statement of witnesses were recorded. Statement of prosecutrix were recorded on the same day i.e. 23.02.2022.
From the side of the appellant-accused, it was argued that injured is a habitual offencer. He is having eight criminal case at Police Station Panihar viz. Crime No.61/2002 offence u/s 324, 323, 34 of IPC, Crime No.144/2006 offence u/s 294, 509 of IPC, Crime No.62/2009, offence u/s323, 324, 504, 426, 34 of IPC, Crime No.79/2016 offence u/s 294, 277, 34 of IPC, Crime No.83/17, offence u/s 452, 323, 294, 506 of IPC, Crime No.78/18 of IPC, offence u/s294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC, Crime No.50/2020, offence under Section 294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is further submitted that co-accused has been granted the benefit of bail vide order dated 07.04.2022 in M.cR.C. No.3263/2022 and the case of the applicant is on same footing. Hence, on the ground of parity he prays for grant of bail.
Per contra, State Counsel as well as the counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the 4 available case-diary.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting upon the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned for his regular appearance before the Court concerned on the dates fixed by the Court concerned.
He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Deepak Kumar Agarwal) Judge vv VALSALA VASUDEVAN 2022.04.26 18:19:12 +05'30'