Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kallu @ Kalu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 July, 2020
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
1 M.Cr.C. No.21151/2020
(Kallu @ Kalu and another Vs. State of M.P. and another)
Gwalior Bench: Dated -08.07.2020
Shri Jitendra Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the
applicants.
ShriVinay Kumar, learned PL for the respondent/State.
Matter is heard through Video Conferencing. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants prays for withdrawal of application so far as applicant No.2 Kaliya Bai is concerned.
Prayer accepted.
Application stands dismissed as withdrawn so far as applicant No.2 Kaliya Bai is concerned.
Matter is heard in respect of applicant No.1 Kallu @ Kalu. The applicant No.1 has filed this second bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 14.01.2020, by Police Station Chanderi, District Ashoknagar, in connection with Crime No.13/2020, registered for offence under Sections 376(ab), 363, 366(a), 109 of IPC and Section 5m/6, 17 of the POCSO Act.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant No.1 that applicant is suffering confinement since 14.01.2020. It is further submitted that his name for the first time figured in the statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Applicant No.1 is husband of main accused Kaliya Bai who happens to be HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C. No.21151/2020 (Kallu @ Kalu and another Vs. State of M.P. and another) the Aunt (cqvk) of prosecutrix who was instrumental in sending the prosecutrix alongwith Sohan Pal to Jaipur, where the parents of prosecutrix were residing. Confinement since 14.01.2020 amounts to pretrial detention specially when charge-sheet has already been filed and early trial of the case is bleak possibility. Looking to the period of custody and prevailing situation of COVID-9 pandemic, sympathetically consideration be made. He undertakes to cooperate in trial and would not be a source of embarrassment or harassment to the complainant/prosecutrix. He would not move in the vicinity of complainant party in any manner. He further undertakes to install Arogya Setu App. Under these grounds, prayer for bail has been made.
Learned PL for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for its dismissal.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length through VC and considered the arguments advanced by them.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and in view of COVID-19 pandemic situation, without commenting on the merits of the case, it is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 3 M.Cr.C. No.21151/2020 (Kallu @ Kalu and another Vs. State of M.P. and another) solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. He further undertakes to install Arogya Setu App., if not already installed.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the jail authorities are directed that before releasing the applicant, his preliminary Corona Virus test shall be conducted and if he is found negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his house, and if he is found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerned hospital for him treatment as per medical norms. If the applicant is fit for release and if he is in a position to make him personal arrangements, then he shall be released only after taking due travel permission from local administration. After release, the applicant 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 COVID-19. If it is found that the applicant 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 immediately take him in custody and would sent her to the same HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 4 M.Cr.C. No.21151/2020 (Kallu @ Kalu and another Vs. State of M.P. and another) jail from where he was released.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant 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 applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. The applicant will inform the SHO of concerned police station about his 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 for information.
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.
(Anand Pathak) Judge Digitally signed by RASHID KHAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT Of M P BENCH GWALIOR, RASHID KHAN postalCode=474011, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=23377d7d214c811801fc322b576ca4ed1954237f6 324416af3985b5e9940ed42, serialNumber=111cc474a72b078dc9a89f3cb13bb668fd8e0 e91beda3cb721bbd836d768b09c, cn=RASHID KHAN Date: 2020.07.09 11:22:10 +05'30' HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 5 M.Cr.C. No.21151/2020 (Kallu @ Kalu and another Vs. State of M.P. and another) Rashid