Neeraj Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 November, 2019

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Neeraj Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 November, 2019

None for respondent No. 2/complainant though intimated. Appellant has filed this criminal appeal under Section 14- A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 20/11/2019 passed by Special Judge (Attrocities), District-Morena, whereby bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant has been dismissed by the trial Court.

Appellant is apprehending his arrest for the offence registered at Crime No.149/2019, at Police Station Rithorakalan, District Morena, punishable under Sections 376,506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(w)(II)of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is apprehending his arrest on the basis of registration of offence as referred above. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that complaint has been made on 7/11/2019 and FIR has been registered in respect of alleged offence committed on 12/12/2018 by appellant in respect of offence MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (2) ( Cr.A.No.10091/2019) ( Neeraj Sharma Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) under Section 376 of IPC; whereas, appellant and prosecutrix entered in nuptial bond on 3/12/2014 vide Annexure A/3, which is a certificate of Arya Samaj Mandir, Loha Mandi, Kilagate, Gwalior, which indicates that marriage has been solemnized and they started living as couple. Learned counsel for the appellant further refers the driving licence of complainant (Annexure A/4) and treatment paper of complainant of District Hospital, Sheopur (Annexure A/5) to show that she referred her name as wife of present appellant. Recently appellant came to know about one disturbing fact regarding marital antecedents of complainant because she was earlier married to one Jitendra and she was blessed with a girl child Avantika, therefore, because of said fact, domestic relationship between appellant and prosecutrix turned soured, therefore, as a coutner blast, this case has been registered. Confinement would bring social disrepute and professional inconvenience and in fact it is a case of domestic dispute rather than any other offence. Appellant undertakes to cooperate in investigation and trial and would make himself available as and when required by the investigating officer and trial Court. He further undertake to perform community services.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (3) ( Cr.A.No.10091/2019) ( Neeraj Sharma Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) the bail application and prayed for the dismissal of the same.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and fact situation of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this appeal in the following terms.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority/ Investigating Authority.

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 himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/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 he is accused;

5. The 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 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (4) ( Cr.A.No.10091/2019) ( Neeraj Sharma Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) may be;

7. As per the undertaking given by counsel on behalf of the appellant, it is hereby directed that appellant shall plant 02 saplings (either fruit bearing trees or Neem/ Peepal) alongwith tree guards or has to make arrangement for fencing for protection of the trees because it is the duty of the appellant not only to plant the saplings but also to nurture them.

** o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gS A** He shall plant saplings/ trees preferably of 6-8 ft., so that they would grow into full fledged trees at an early time. For ensuring the compliance, he shall have to submit all the photographs of plantation of trees/ saplings before the concerned trial Court alongwith a report within 30 days from the date of release of the appellant. The report shall be submitted by the appellant before the trial Court every month till conclusion of the trial.

It is the duty of the trial Court to monitor the progress of the trees because human existence is at stake because of the environmental degradation and Court cannot put a blind fold over any casualness shown by the appellant regarding compliance. Therefore, trial Court is directed to submit a report regarding progress of the trees and the compliance made by the appellant by placing a short report before this Court every quarterly (every three months), which shall be placed under the caption "Direction" before this Court.

Any default on behalf of appellant in plantation or caring of trees shall disentitle the appellant from enjoying the benefit of bail.

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT (5) ( Cr.A.No.10091/2019) ( Neeraj Sharma Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) The appellant shall be at liberty to plant these saplings/trees in his vicinity, if he intends to protect the trees on his own cost by providing tree guards or fencing.

This direction is made by this Court as a test case to address the Anatomy of Violence and Evil by process of Creation and a step towards Alignment with Nature. The natural instinct of compassion, service, love and mercy needs to be rekindled for human existence as they are innately engrained attributes of human existence.

"It is not the question of Plantation of a Tree but the Germination of a Thought."

A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Anand Pathak) Judge jps/-

JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI 2019.11.28 10:38:02 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court