Madhya Pradesh High Court
Piyush vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 October, 2020
Author: Vandana Kasrekar
Bench: Vandana Kasrekar
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :INDORE BENCH
M.Cr.C. No.38100/2020
(Piyush Vs. State of M.P.)
Indore dated :19/10/2020
Heard through video conferencing.
Shri Avinash Sirpurkar, learned Senior Counsel with
Shri Pratap Singh Kuswaha, learned counsel for the
applicant.
Shri Palash Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer for the
non-applicant/State.
Heard. Case diary perused.
This is first application filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.83/2020,
registered at Police Station - Simrol, District - Indore for
commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 201,
365, 343, 34, 364 and 377 of IPC and under Sections 67, 67-
A of I.T. Act, 2000. The applicant is in custody since
16/03/2020.
As per prosecution case, on 10/03/2020, complainant / informant Deva Bundela informed the police Simrol that, on 10/03/2020 at around 09.00 hrs. the complainant went to the Baighat to collect fire wood and when he reached pulia situated prior to the Baighat Toila Baba he saw that, a dead body of an unknown person aged about 45 years was lying by the side on the road and he was wearing red t-shirt and black colour lower. On the basis of said oral information, police Simrol registered the Marg Intimation No.9/2020 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. at about 12.10 hrs and enquired the matter. During the course of inquiry, police prepared inquest HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :INDORE BENCH M.Cr.C. No.38100/2020 (Piyush Vs. State of M.P.) form and also prepared Panchyatnama Laash. The dead body was identified by the brother of the deceased Gyaneshwar and he informed the police that the name of deceased is Pramod @ Kamlakar. Thereafter, Postmortem was conducted and on 12/03/2020 police registered the FIR against unknown persons for the offence under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. On the basis of secret information, police got the information that one Jagdish @ Jaggu Taank was involved in the commission of the alleged offence, hence, on 16/03/2020 police arrested the co-accused Jagdish @ Jaggu and seized mobile phone from his possession. It is alleged that, in the said mobile the police got the photographs and video of the deceased which were prepared much prior to the alleged offence and also recorded the disclosure memo under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act of co-accused Jagdish @ Jaggu in which he disclosed that he is the driver of co-accused Hemant since 15 years and the deceased also was driver of Hemant and he knows the deceased. It is alleged that applicant Piyush is habitual in carnal intercourse against the order of nature with the deceased and due to which quarrels took place between the co-accused Piyush and his wife. Thus, deceased spoiled the life of the applicant. This information came to the knowledge of the co-accused Hemant, hence, the co-accused hatched the conspiracy to commit murder of Pramod @ Kamlakar. It is alleged that on 7/03/2020 Jagdish @ jaggu, Lokesh Bhatt and Sonu Thakur reached at the office of the co-accused Hemant where co- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :INDORE BENCH M.Cr.C. No.38100/2020 (Piyush Vs. State of M.P.) accused Hemant ordered them to bring out the deceased. Thereafter, they took the deceased from the tea shop of Gurucharn Singh in the swift car to the office of co-accused Hemant where co-accused caused injuries to the deceased by means of stick, belt and cricket bat and confined him in a room. The allegation against the present applicant is that the applicant hatched conspiracy alongwith co-accused persons and also caused disappearance of evidence of the offence to screen the offenders of the alleged incident.
Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. The present case is based on circumstantial evidence. He submits that the name of present applicant does not reflect in the FIR, neither there is any allegation that he caused injury to the deceased nor he participated in the commission of the alleged offence. He has been implicated only on the basis of 27 memo of co-accused Jagdish @ Jaggu. No seizure of stick as alleged therein has been seized form the present applicant. He further submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence without there being any mens rea or actus reus of the applicant in the alleged offence. There is no legal evidence came against the applicant which demonstrate that the applicant is directly or indirectly involved in the commission of alleged offence. He further submits that the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. In HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH :INDORE BENCH M.Cr.C. No.38100/2020 (Piyush Vs. State of M.P.) the light of the aforesaid, he prays for grant of bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant/State opposed the prayer and submits that there is ample evidence on record which shows actual participation of the present applicant in the alleged crime. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail application.
Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case so also the material evidence available in the case diary, I am of the view that there is ample evidence on record against the present applicant which shows that he is deeply involved in the alleged crime. However, no ground for bail is made out.
Accordingly, present bail application U/s 439 Cr.P.C., filed on behalf of the applicant/accused stands dismissed.
(Ms. Vandana Kasrekar) Judge pn Digitally signed by Preetha Nair Date: 2020.10.22 15:05:09 +05'30'