Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajan @ Rajendra Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 June, 2020
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-3465-2020
(RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Gwalior, Dated:-23/06/2020
Shri A.S. Rathore, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ravindra Singh Kushwah, Dy. Advocate General for the
respondent/State.
Matter is heard through video conferencing. Present appeal has been filed under Section 14-(A) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 02/05/2020 passed by Special Court, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Shivpuri, District Shivpuri (M.P.) whereby the application of the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail has been rejected.
Appellant has been arrested on 29/04/2020 in connection with Crime No.76/2020 registered at Police Station Mayapur, District Shivpuri(M.P.), punishable under Sections 354 and 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant - Rajan @ Rajendra Singh Yadav that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the case and he is in custody since 29.04.2020. The only allegations against the present appellant is that he had caught hold the hand of the 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3465-2020 (RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) prosecutrix. The false case has been registered against the present appellant as there is previous enmity between the accused and the father of the prosecutrix with regard to demarcation of land. Some land of the accused was illegally acquired by the father of the prosecutrix, therefore, this concocted case has got been registered against the present appellant. The other co-accused who is aged around 17 years has already been granted the benefit of bail by Juvenile Justice Board. The trial will take its own time and appellant is ready to abide by any condition which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed to grant bail to the appellant.
Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer and has submitted that the offence has been committed against the minor (girl). The case has been registered under Section 354 and 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012. Hence, prays to reject the present bail application of the appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them and perused the record.
The Supreme Court by order dated 23-3-2020 passed in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 has directed all the 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3465-2020 (RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) States to constitute a High Level Committee to consider the release of prisoners in order to decongest the prisons. The Supreme Court has observed as under :
"The issue of overcrowding of prisons is a matter of serious concern particularly in the present context of the pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID
- 19).
Having regard to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it has become imperative to ensure that the spread of the Corona Virus within the prisons is controlled. We direct that each State/Union Territory shall constitute a High Powered Committee comprising of (i) Chairman of the State Legal Services Committee, (ii) the Principal Secretary (Home/Prison) by whatever designation is known as, (ii) Director General of Prison(s), to determine which class of prisoners can be released on parole or an interim bail for such period as may be thought appropriate. For instance, the State/Union Territory could consider the release of prisoners who have been convicted or are under trial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or less, with or without fine and the prisoner has been convicted for a lesser number of years than the maximum. It is made clear that we leave it open for the High Powered Committee to determine the category of prisoners who should be released as aforesaid, depending upon the nature of offence, the number of years to which he or she has been sentenced or the severity of the offence with which he/she is charged with and is facing trial or any other relevant factor, which the Committee may consider appropriate."
In view of the aforesaid and considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, without commenting upon the 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3465-2020 (RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) merits of the case, the appeal is allowed and it is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy 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 date fixed by the Court.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the jail authorities are directed that before releasing the appellant, his Corona Virus test shall be conducted and if his test is found negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the appellant to his house, and if the test is found positive then the appellant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. If the appellant is fit for release and if he is in a position to make his personal arrangements, then he shall be released only after taking due travel permission from local administration. After release, the appellant is further directed to strictly follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration for combating the Covid19. If it is found that the appellant has violated any of the instructions (whether general or specific) issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration, then this order shall automatically lose its effect, and the Local Administration/Police Authorities shall 5 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3465-2020 (RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) immediately take him in custody and would send him to the same jail from where he was released.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellant :-
1.The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The appellant will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not move in the vicinity of complainant party and appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;
and
7. The appellant will inform the SHO of concerned police station about their residential address in the said area and it would be 6 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-3465-2020 (RAJAN @ RAJENDRA SINGH YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of concerned police station for information.
Appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible for the office of this Court.
Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava) Judge vpn VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI 2020.06.23 18:49:33 +05'30' VALSALA VASUDEVAN 2018.10.26 15:14:29 -07'00'