Madhya Pradesh High Court
Girraj Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 May, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 1
CRA 2384/2021
Girraj Singh Yadav Vs. State of MP and Anr.
Heard through Video Conferencing
Gwalior, dated 31/05/2021
Shri Vijay Dutt Sharma, Counsel for the appellant.
Shri BPS Chauhan, Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1/
State.
None for the respondent No. 2/complainant.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the order dated 09/10/2020 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Ashok Nagar by which the application filed by the appellant under Section 84/85 of CrPC for release of seized property was dismissed.
It is submitted by the Counsel for the appellant that Crime No. 108/2020 has been registered against the appellant for offence under Sections 302, 307, 294, 147, 148, 149, 436 of IPC and under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(iv), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ( in short '' the Act, 1989''). Since the appellant was absconding, therefore, proceedings under Sections 82 & 83 of CrPC were initiated and the properties of the appellant including the bank account were attached. After the arrest of the appellant, the appellant filed an application under Section 84/85 of CrPC for release of the attached property, THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 CRA 2384/2021 Girraj Singh Yadav Vs. State of MP and Anr.
however, the said application has been rejected by the impugned order. It is submitted by the Counsel for the appellant that the appellant is medically sick and accordingly, he had filed an application for grant of bail which was rejected by this Court. The appellant filed a SLP (Cri) No.1406/2021 before the Supreme Court which was disposed of by order dated 19th March, 2021 with the following observations:-
''Accordingly, we direct the respondent-State shall ensure that the appellant is taken to AIIMS, New Delhi for further treatment while keeping in police custody and the entire cost of medical treatment and security provided by the State shall be borne by the appellant. '' It is submitted that the bank account of the appellant has been attached, therefore, he is not in a position to pay the cost of medical treatment as well as the cost of police protection and accordingly, it is prayed that the bank account of the appellant may be released.
Per contra, it is submitted by the Counsel for the State that the appellant is an influential person and he has a criminal history and as many as 23 criminal cases including heinous offences were registered against him and in all those cases, either the witnesses did not support the prosecution case or they entered into a compromise which clearly indicates the muscle power of the appellant. It is further submitted that the appellant had absconded after the offence was committed and the Trial Court has rightly refused to release the property including that of bank account.THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3
CRA 2384/2021
Girraj Singh Yadav Vs. State of MP and Anr.
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It is the case of the appellant hat he is medically sick and requires treatment in AIIMS, New Delhi and accordingly, the Supreme Court has directed the State Authorities to ensure that the appellant is taken to AIIMS, New Delhi for further treatment while keeping him in police custody and it was also directed that the entire cost of medical treatment and security provided by the State shall be borne by the appellant.
Without money, the appellant cannot get himself treated in AIIMS, New Delhi. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled for release of amount which is required for his treatment in AIIMS, New Delhi as well as for bearing the cost of police security. In view of the limited prayer made by the Counsel for the appellant, it is directed that in case if the appellant submits advance bills to the concerning bank, from AIIMS, New Delhi towards expenses of his treatment as well as advance bills from PHQ / competent authority, Bhopal for providing police security, then the bank shall release the amount so mentioned in the advance bills in favour of AIIMS, New Delhi and the Police Department, Bhopal (MP) directly. In case, for any reason, if the said amount remains unutilized either in whole or in part, then the AIIMS, New Delhi and the Police Department, Bhopal (MP) shall remit back the amount in the account THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 CRA 2384/2021 Girraj Singh Yadav Vs. State of MP and Anr.
of the appellant.
It is made clear that the appellant shall not be entitled to withdraw any amount for his treatment but the amount shall be credited directly in the account of AIIMS, New Delhi and the Police Department, Bhopal (MP).
No further argument is advanced by the Counsel for the appellant.
With aforesaid modifications, the order dated 09/10/2020 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Ashok Nagar, is hereby affirmed.
The Criminal Appeal is finally disposed of.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Vacation Judge MKB MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK 2021.06.03 10:53:37 +05'30'