Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hariom vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 July, 2021
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-33471-2021
(HARIOM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Indore, Dated : 14-07-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Virendra Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. .
Shri Jayesh Vyas PL for the respondent / State.
This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is in Jail since 25/04/2021 in connection with Crime No. 420/2021 registered at P.S.- Chimanganj Mandi, District- Ujjain (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 188,420, 120-B of the IPC, section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 section 24 of Ayurvedic Adhiniyam, section 5/13 of M.P. Drug Control Act, 1949 and section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act.
2 As per prosecution story, on 25/04/2021, ASI Ravindra Katare received a secret information that some persons are indulging in black marketing of Remidesivir injection. He along with police force, went to the spot of Alliance City, Agar Road, Ujjain and caught three accused persons namely Lokesh Anjana, Priyesh Chouhan and Bhanupratap Rajput. During their search, one Remdesivir injection was seized from the possession of co-accused Lokesh Anjana. The co- accused persons had no valid documents for it. They are indulged in black marketing of the alleged injection, which is highly required for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Such injection are to be supplied for the use only in hospitals/institutions to ensure proper use of the drugs as required. It is also alleged that on the basis of memorandum recorded under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act of the co- accused persons, the police officials arrested the present applicant Hariom. He admitted that he had given the said Remdesivir injection to co-accused Lokesh, Priyesh and Bhanupratap to sell it on higher price. During search, one TOZOTUM, RX PIPERACILLIN and TAZOBACTAM injection have been recovered from the possession of the present applicant, without any valid document. Along with the present applicant, some other co-accused persons have been arrested in connection with their indulgence in the offence of black marketing of Remdesivir injection.
3 Learned counsel for ther applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this offence. He was neither beneficiary, nor seller of Remdesivir injection. He was not caught red handed on the spot. On the basis of memorandum under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act of the co-accused persons, he has been implicated in this case. The alleged injection, which is said to have been recovered from him, is not related to corona virus. No offence is made out against him. He is first year student of nursing bio. Possession of singular injection, which is said to have been recovered is not an offence. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed, but conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. It is further submitted that the alleged offences are triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class and the offence under section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act is bailable in nature. Under such circumstances, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4 Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State has vehemently opposed the bail application stating that considering the conduct of the applicant, as he along with other co-accused persons was indulged in black marketing of Remdesivir injection during COVID- 19 pandemic crisis, which was not available in open market, and thus, deprived the needy patients out of their reach, therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, benefit of bail cannot be granted to the applicant.
5 Undoubtedly, all the offences registered against the present applicant is exclusively triable by JMFC and the offences under sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act is bailable in nature. The offences under section 3(3) of the Epidemic Diseases Act,1897 is punishable with imprisonment for a term, which shall not less than six months, but which may be extended to seven years and fine, which shall not be less than Rs. 1,00,000/-, but which may be extended to Rs. 5,00,000/-.
6 Section 3(C) of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 provides that " where a person is prosecuted for committing an offence punishable under sub-section (3) of section 3, the Court shall presume that such person has committed such offence, unless the contrary is proved ".
7 The alleged offences are related to black marketing of Remdesivir injection. Although no Remdesivir injection has been directly recovered from the possession of the applicant, but on the basis of evidence available on record, it is prima-facie established that the present applicant was also indulged in the black marketing of the Remdesivir injection in connivance with other co-accused persons. 8 Although learned counsel for the applicant submitted that no offence is made out against the present applicant, looking to the fact of the case and prima-facie evidence available on record, but at this stage, it cannot be said that it is a case of no evidence. 9 It is a known fact that during COVID-19 pandemic, oxygen, ventilator, oxygen cylinder and antiviral drugs like Remdesivir injection were in high demand. The offences alleged to have been committed by the present applicant are not only serious in nature, but also heinous. The thousand of patients on dead bed were trying for medicines, whereas medicines necessary for treatment of the patients suffering from COVID-19 pandemic were black marketed on exorbitant price. The crime committed by the present applicant is certainly a crime against the society and humanity. Such human conduct is highly deplorable, when the society at large come together to tide over their difficulties and turbulent time, whereas arising of time of COVID-19 pandemic, it is shocking to see that some persons had indulged themselves in black marketing of such drugs. In such pandemic situation, the Court cannot mute as a spectator and cannot turn a nelson's eye to such incident.
10 Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case as also looking to the gravity of the alleged offences, the present applicant do not deserve for the benefit of bail. 11 Consequently, present application filed by the applicant under section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail is hereby dismissed.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE amol Digitally signed by AMOL N MAHANAG Date: 2021.07.15 16:40:26 +05'30'