Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kuldeep Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 September, 2021
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.47033/2021
(Kuldeep Yadav Vs. The State of M.P.)
(1)
Gwalior, dated : 23/9/2021
Shri Sheeshu Yadav, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Avneesh Singh, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Case diary perused.
The applicant has filed this third application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The first one was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 7/4/2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.18389/2021, while the second application was rejected on merits vide order dated 24/6/2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.30837/2021.
The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Sevdha, District Datia in connection with Crime No.170/2020 registered in relation to the offences punishable under sections 323, 324, 325, 326, 294, 506, 307, 34 of the IPC.
Allegations against the applicant and other co-accused persons, in short, are that the complainant- Dharmendra Singh Chauhan on 20/09/2020 in injured condition has lodged a report at police station concerned to the effect that on 19/09/2020 at about 11.30 PM, in the night, he along with Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Dharmendra Singh Bais was watching T.V., at that time, the co- accused- Naresh armed with gun came along with co-accused Sanju Yadav, Pramod Singh Yadav and Suresh Singh Yadav, who were armed with Axe and started abusing the complainant filthily, which HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.47033/2021 (Kuldeep Yadav Vs. The State of M.P.) (2) was opposed by the complainant, who told them to vacate the house. Thereafter, the coaccused- Naresh assaulted the complainant
-Dharmendra Singh Chauhan by means of butt of the gun, whereas, other co-accused persons assaulted the victim by means of Axe, due to which, the victim received injury on the head and blood started oozing out, Thereafter, co-accused Naresh called on mobile phone the other coaccused persons from village and thereafter, the present applicant Kuldeep, co-accused - Dinesh Yadav, Khem Singh and Deepu armed with Lathis came on the spot and they all assaulted the victims by means of Axe and Lathi, due to which, the victims received various injuries on their body. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in custody since 23/11/2020. Charge-sheet has been filed and no further custodial interrogation is required. After rejection of the previous application on merits, co-accused Naresh has been given the benefit of bail vide order dated 24/8/2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.40360/2021 and the applicant deserves parity in treatment. The applicant has already put in 10 months of incarceration and conclusion of trial is likely to take time. Owing to COVID-19 outrbeak, detention of applicant in already congested prisons may be detrimental. He is a permanent resident of Village Nandpur, P.S. Sevdha, District Datia and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.47033/2021 (Kuldeep Yadav Vs. The State of M.P.) (3) evidence if released on bail. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the material change in the circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. The applicant shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.47033/2021 (Kuldeep Yadav Vs. The State of M.P.) (4) issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant shall install Aarogya Setu App (if not already installed) in his mobile phone.
2. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
3. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
4. The applicant will not indulge 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;
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. If the applicant commits any offence while on bail, this order shall automatically stand cancelled without reference to the Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge (and) ANAND SHRIVASTAVA 2021.09.23 16:46:13 +05'30'