Nandram Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1637 MP

                          1
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                        MCRC.No.20502/2021
              (Nandram Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated : 28.04.2021

      Shri Harish Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Shri Manish Nayak, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.

      Shri Nitin Agrawal, learned counsel for the complainant.

      Heard on I.A.No.12777/2021, application under Section 301 (2)

of Cr.P.C. for assisting the Govt. Advocate in the matter.

      For the reasons mentioned in the said application, I.A.No.

12777/2021 is allowed and Shri Nitin Agrawal, counsel for the

complainant is permitted to assist the Govt. Advocate in the matter.

      Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

      The applicant has filed this third application u/S.439 Cr.P.C. for

grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested on 24.08.2020 by Police

Station Badoni, District Datia (M.P.) in connection with Crime

No.93/2020 registered in relation to the offence punishable u/Ss. 324,

323, 294, 506, 34 IPC and added Sections 307 and 325 of IPC.

      It is alleged by the counsel for the applicant that the first bail

application was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated

11.11.2020 in M.Cr.C.No.43734/2020 and the second bail application

was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 26.03.2021 in M.Cr.C.

No.16677/2021. The applicant is in custody since 24.08.2020. Looking

to the present pandemic scenario of Covid-19, there is no possibility of

recording the statement before the trial Court and the trial Court is not
                            2
               HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         MCRC.No.20502/2021
               (Nandram Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.)

functioning properly. He has relied upon the judgment passed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare Vs.

State of Maharashtra, 2001 (1) SCC (Cr.) 410. The applicant is ready

to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this

court while considering the application for grant of bail. There is no

possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.

Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for

grant of bail to the applicant.

      Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the

bail application stating that there are no changed circumstances after

rejection of the earlier application and the applicant is having another

case registered in the year 2013.

      Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and

looking to the custody period of the applicant and the judgment passed

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare,

this Court deems it appropriate to allow this application.

      The application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be

released on bail on furnishing surety bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty

Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the

satisfaction of the Investigation Officer/trial Court as the case may be

with submission of written undertaking and the applicant will abide by

all terms and conditions of the different circulars, orders as well as
                              3
                HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           MCRC.No.20502/2021
                 (Nandram Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.)

guidelines issued by the Central Government, State Government as

well as Local Administration for maintaining social distancing, hygiene

etc to avoid Novel Corona Virus (COVID -19) pandemic and he will

have to install Arogya Setu App, if not already installed.

         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 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 move in the vicinity of complainant party

and the applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the

trial;

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 concerned S.H.O. of concerned

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC.No.20502/2021 (Nandram Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.)

Police Station about his residential address in the said area and it

would be the duty of the Panel Lawyer to send copy of this order to

SHO of concerned police station as well as the concerning

Superintendent of Police who shall inform the concerned SHO

regarding the same.

Application stands allowed.

In view of the COVID-19, jail authorities are directed that before

releasing the applicant, medical examination of applicant shall be

undertaken by the jail doctor and on prima facie, if it is found that he is

having the symptoms of COVID-19, then consequential follow up

action including the isolation/quarantine or any test if required, be

ensured, otherwise applicant shall be released immediately on bail and

shall be given a pass or permit for movement to reach his place of

residence.

E-copy/Certified copy as per rules/directions.

                                                 (Vishal Mishra)
AK/-                                                 Judge
        ANAND KUMAR
        2021.04.28
        19:09:18 +05'30'