Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Jamnabai Bheel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 October, 2020
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Gwalior, Dated : 12.10.2020
Shri Nitin Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri R.K. Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
This is second appeal u/S.439 Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant for
grant of bail.
In the wake of unprecedented and uncertain situation due to
outbreak of the Novel Corona virus (COVID-19) and considering the
advisories issued by the Government of India, this application has been
heard and decided through video conferencing to maintain social
distancing. The parties are being represented by the respective counsels
through video conferencing, following the norms of social distancing/
physical distancing in letter and spirit.
This second Criminal Appeal for grant of bail has been filed by
the appellant under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short SC/ST Act)
against the order dated 27.02.2020 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST
Act), Guna, whereby the Bail Application No.204/2020 filed by the
appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.c. for grant of bail, has been
rejected.
The appellant has been arrested on 29.11.2019 in connection
with Crime No.203/2019 registered at Police Station Bajrangarh,
2
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
District Guna for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C
and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act.
It is submitted that earlier criminal appeal was dismissed vide
order dated 29.05.2020 on merits in Cr.A No. 2650/2020. It is argued
that the appellant is a lady and is in custody since 29.11.2019. It is
submitted that the earlier bail application was taken up into
consideration along with the application of principal accused i.e. co-
accused Harveer who has said to have inflicted fatal injury to the
deceased. He has drawn attention of this Court to the order sheet dated
29.05.2020 passed in Cr.A No. 2650/2020 wherein, it is observed that
counsel for the State has argued that blood stained Axe has been
recovered from the house of the present appellant, whereas, the Axe
was not recovered from the house of Jamna Bai, it has been recovered
from the bushes near the river lying in the middle of the village Badli.
It is submitted that the main allegation of inflicting injury is on co-
accused Harveer and as per the medical report also the cause of death
the injury sustained to the head of the deceased by the sharp cutting
object i.e. Axe. In the medical report also three incised wounds were
found on the head of the deceased. It is submitted that the allegation
against the present appellant is that she was armed with the lathi and
has inflicted injuries by means of a lathi. It is argued that six
prosecution witnesses have already been examined and now only the
police witnesses are required to be examined. He has drawn attention
3
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
of this Court to the statement of one Kamal wheel (PW/1) wherein, he
has stated that owing to suspicion, name of Jamna Bai was mentioned
in the FIR owing to the fact that the deceased used to frequently visited
the house of the Jamna Bai. He has further drawn attention of this
Court to the statement of (P.W.3) a child witness i.e. son of the Jamna
Bai who has denied the factum of inflicting injury by lathi by the
present appellant to the deceased. He has also denied the inflicting of
injury by Harveer by an axe to the deceased. He was declared hostile in
the matter. It is submitted that the appellant being a lady and is in
custody since 29.11.2019. Charge sheet has already been filed in the
matter, therefore, no further custodial interrogation may be necessary.
It is further argued that the benefit of Section 437 (2) and (3) of Cr.P.C
is required to be extended to the present appellant who is a lady. The
appellant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be
imposed by this court while considering the application for grant of
bail. The appellant has further shown her willingness to contribute an
amount of Rs.10,000/- in the account of High Court Bar Association,
Gwalior for benefit of the lawyers during this COVID-19 scenario.
There is no possibility of her absconding or tampering with the
prosecution case. Learned counsel for the appellant prays for bail to the
appellant during this Covid-19 pandemic scenario.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application
stating that on earlier occasion all the arguments were already
4
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and has also pointed
out the statements of the prosecution witnesses and after taking into the
consideration of the aforesaid material available on the record, this
Court has rejected the appeal on merits. It is submitted that no new
ground is available to the appellant. A specific query was put to the
State counsel to point out that whether the blood stained Axe was
recovered from the house of Jamna Bai or not. After going though the
case diary, he fairly submits that the blood stained Axe was not
recovered from the house of Jamna Bai, rather it was recovered from
the bushes near the river lying in the middle of the Village Badli. It is
specific query was again put that whether what is the nature of injury
caused to the deceased and whether the fatal injuries was caused by the
present appellant. He fairly submits that the appellant has inflicted
injury by means of a stick and the fatal injury was caused by co-
accused Harveer by an Axe, resulting into the death of deceased-
Shankar Wheel. He further admits the factum of filing of charge sheet
and appellant is having no criminal history.
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 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
5
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
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."
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and
coupled with the fact that the appellant is a lady and the fatal injury is
caused by co-accused Harveer and considering the Covid-19 pandemic
scenario, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the bail appeal.
Accordingly, the application is allowed. The appellant is directed
to 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 like
amount to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer /trial Court, as
the case may be with submission of written undertaking and she shall
6
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-4679-2020
(SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
abide by all terms and conditions of the different circulars, orders as
well as guidelines issued by the Central Government, State
Government as well as Local Administration for maintaining social
distancing, hygiene etc to avoid Novel Corona Virus (COVID -19)
pandemic and she will have to install Arogya Setu App, if not already
installed.
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 her;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The appellant will not indulge herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her 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 she is accused.
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. 7
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-4679-2020 (SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
7. The appellant shall deposit Rs.10,000/- in the account of High Court Bar Association, Gwalior for the purpose of assistance and rehabilitation of those members of the Bar, who are facing financial distress due to Lockdown and restrictive functioning of the courts owing to ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, within seven days from today.
8. The appellant will inform the concerned S.H.O. of concerned Police Station about her residential address in the said area and it would be the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of concerned police station as well as Superintendent of Police, concerned who shall inform the concerned SHO regarding the same.
In view of the COVID-19, jail authorities are directed that before releasing the appellant, medical examination of appellant shall be undertaken by the jail doctor and on prima facie, if it is found that she is having the symptoms of COVID-19, then consequential follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any test if required, be ensured, otherwise appellants shall be released immediately on bail and shall be given a pass or permit for movement to reach her place of residence.
E- copy of this order be provided to the appellant and E-copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance. It is made clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy 8 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-4679-2020 (SMT. JAMNABAI BHEEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) for practical purposes in respect of this order.
(Vishal Mishra)
LJ*/- Judge
LOKENDRA
JAIN
2020.10.13
17:42:33
-07'00'