Madhya Pradesh High Court
Amit Puri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 July, 2020
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 MCRC-17935-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-17935-2020
(AMIT PURI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 16-07-2020
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Prakash Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri Puneet Shroti, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.
This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
The applicants-accused are in custody since 01.03.2020 in connection with Crime No. 60/2020, registered at Police Station Naigarhi District Rewa for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.
As per prosecution case, in short, is that on the basis of dehati nalishi, the police has registered the case against the unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. The dehati nalishi was written on the instance of Mukesh Puri (husband of deceased). It is mentioned in the dehati nalishi, that on 21.02.2020 in the evening at about 7 to 8 O'clock, the deceased told the complainant to grind flour. After an hour when the complainant returned to house, his daughters were weeping. The daughters have informed that the deceased went towards house of one Basanti. On searching, the complainant could not trace out her. On 23.02.2020, at about 12 pm the complainant asked to applicant Amit Puri and other about her wife (deceased) because an year ago, the applicant No. 1 took the deceased anywhere. On suspicious, the complainant searched on the well situated beside the house of applicant No. 1 and he saw the sari of deceased. The dead body of deceased was recovered from said well. In post mortem report the cause of death is found as asphyxia due to throttling which was anti- mortem in nature. During investigation, the police recorded the memorandum of accused persons and found that there was love affair between the 2 MCRC-17935-2020 deceased and applicant No.1 and the deceased was pressurizing the applicant No. 1 to take her with him and to get rid from the deceased, the applicant No. 1 connivance with applicant No. 2 murdered the deceased. Hence, the police filed the charge sheet for the offence under Section 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in this case. Initially the FIR was registered against the unknown person but later the applicants are arrested only on the basis of suspicion. He further argued that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicants. The police has arrested the applicants only on the basis of presumption arose from earlier incident when the applicant No. 1 took the deceased away from the complainant. He further submits that the dead body was recovered from the well on 23.02.2020 and as per spot map, the said well is situated in front of the house of complainant, hence, it clearly shows that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the case. The statement of last seen witness namely Ramayanpuri is also not reliable as same was recorded on 11.03.2020 after passing more than 15 days. He also did not inform anybody prior to recovery of dead body i.e. 23.02.2020 that he saw the deceased along with the applicants on 21.02.2020. Apart from that the charge sheet has been filed and no further interrogation is required in this case. Due to outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, the further proceeding of trial Court is withheld, therefore, trial will take long time for final disposal. There is no probability of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence by the accused/applicants. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicants prays for grant of bail to the applicants.
Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State opposes the submission made by the applicant's counsel and submits that Ramayan Puri is the last seen witness of the case who saw the deceased along with applicants on 21.02.2020. Therefore, there is strong evidence in the case against the 3 MCRC-17935-2020 applicants and they do not deserve to release on bail.
Heard both the parties and perused the copy of charge sheet filed by the applicants.
On perusal of case, it appears that the deceased was missing since 21.02.2020 and her dead body was found on 23.02.2020 from the well. The dehati nalishi was written on 23.02.2020 and on this basis, the FIR was registered on 27.02.2020. Initially, the FIR was registered against the unknown person but during investigation the police found that there was love affair between the applicant No. 1 and deceased and to get rid from her, the applicants murdered her. The learned P.L.pointed out the statement of Ramayanpuri, who proposed to be a last seen witness of the case but it is found that his statement has been recorded on 11.03.2020. On perusal of statement of Ramayanpuri, it is apparent that he saw the deceased along with applicant on 21.02.2020 in the evening time and he came to know about her missing on 22.02.2020 even then he did not disclose the said fact to anyone whereas the dead body was recovered on 23.02.2020. Prima facie there is no direct evidence is found against the applicants. Apart from that charge sheet has been filed and due to outbreak of Covid-19 further proceeding of trial will take time for its conclusion.
Considering the above said circumstances but without commenting on merits of the case, the first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of applicants is allowed.
It is directed that applicants be released on their furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is also directed that the applicants shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
Further in view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-
19)' the applicants shall also comply with the rules and norms of social 4 MCRC-17935-2020 distancing.
Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court i n suo moto W.P. No.01/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-
1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicants by the jail doctor before their release.
2 . The applicants shall not be released if he are suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.
3. If it is found that the applicants are suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing them in appropriate quarantine facility.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE L.R. Digitally signed by LALIT SINGH RANA Date: 2020.07.17 17:33:35 +05'30'