Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt Malti Sikarwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 August, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 MCRC-36662-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-36662-2021
(SMT MALTI SIKARWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Gwalior, Dated : 06-08-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Sanjay Gupta, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Kuldeep Singh PP for the respondent/State.
Shri Ankur Tiwari, counsel for the respondent No.2/complainant.
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C seeking extension of
bail period granted to the petitioner vide order dated 5.5.2021 in
M.Cr.C.No.21800 of 2021. It is alleged that the petitioner is a lady aged about
62 years of age. She was enlarged on bail vide order dated 5.5.2021. It is
submitted that looking to the present scenario of Covid 19 pandemic and also
the directives issued in the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
by order dated 23.03.2020 passed in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF
COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU W.P. (C) No.1/2020
wherein, while considering the situation arising out of the Covid 19 Pandemic
scenario, it has directed all the States to constitute a High Level Committee to
consider the release of prisoners in order to decongest the prisons if they are
not required any further in custody and by Division Bench of this Court
Principal Seat at Jabalpur in W.P.No.9320 of 2021 on 17.5.2021 coupled with
the fact that she is lady and aged about 62 years. Her bail period is to expire
on 6th August, 2021. She is ready to abide with all the conditions which may
be imposed by this court while considering this petition. On these grounds,
he prayed for extension of bail period.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State as well as counsel
for the complainant have vehemently opposed the application stating that in
pursuance to the order passed by this court on earlier occasion i.e. on
5.5.2021 the petitioner had to comply with the order and surrender before the
trial court and thereafter, she may apply for regular bail. It is further submitted
2 MCRC-36662-2021
that looking to the involvement of the petitioner in commission of offence, no
case for bail is made out. The effect of Covid 19 Pandemic scenario is
reduced to the great extent and in such circumstances, she may surrender first
and comply with the order and apply for regular bail. There is active
participation of the petitioner in commission of offence and as per
prosecution allegations she caught hold the hairs of the deceased and her son
pushed her which resulted into the death of deceased. The aforesaid
statement has been given by the eye witnesses and one of them happens to be
her son. In such circumstances, he prays for rejection of the petition.
Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, this court
does not deem it appropriate to extend the bail period of the petitioner. She is
directed to comply with the directives issued by this court on earlier occasion
and surrender first and thereafter, she may apply for regular bail.
This petition sans merits and is accordingly rejected.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Rks
RAM KUMAR
SHARMA
2021.08.09
10:49:56 +05'30'
