Sonu Mirza vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4777 MP

                 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
             1                                  M.Cr.C.No.41529/2021
                    (Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

Gwalior Bench:Dated -27/08/2021

      Shri F.A. Shah, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Shri B.M. Shrivastava, learned PP for the respondent/State.

Shri Ravi Dwivedi and Shri S.K. Dubey, learned counsel

for the complainant.

Matter is heard through Video Conferencing.

The applicant has filed this fourth bail application u/S.439

Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 20-10-

2019 by Police Station Bahodapur, District Gwalior in connection

with Crime No.752/2019 registered for offence punishable under

Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Sections 5l/6 of

POCSO Act. His earlier bail applications were dismissed as

withdrawn.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that

false case has been registered against him and he is suffering

confinement since 20-10-2019 and recently material prosecution

witnesses (including prosecutrix) have been examined and

prosecutrix stood to her ground regarding allegations. Now

chance of tampering with the evidence/witnesses is remote. Even

otherwise, applicant is a boy aged 19 years and a chance be given

to reform himself and for course correction so that he can purge HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

his misdeed, if any and to serve National/Environmental/Social

cause. Confinement amounts to pretrial detention. He undertakes

not to be source of embarrassment and harassment to the

complainant party in any manner and would not move in their

vicinity. He further undertakes to abide by all the terms and

conditions of guidelines, circulars and directions issued by

Central Government, State Government as well as Local

Administration regarding measures in respect of COVID-19

Pandemic and maintain hygiene in the vicinity while keeping

physical distancing. Further looking to the situation of pandemic,

he intends to serve the National/Environmental/Social cause

voluntarily, in case bail is granted.

Counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for

dismissal of this bail application.

Learned counsel for the complainant also opposed the

prayer on the ground that after statement of prosecutrix family

members of applicant threatened brother of prosecutrix, therefore,

complaint has been made at Police Station Bahodapur District

Gwalior.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and

considered the arguments advanced by them.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

Considering the submissions specially the fact that

prosecutrix has been examined before Court and looking to the

period of custody as well as the fact that applicant is 19 years old

boy without any criminal record, therefore, a chance be given to

him to reform himself but with certain stringent conditions.

Therefore, as per the spirit echoed in the order of Sunita

Gandharva Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2020 (3) MPLJ(Cri.)

247, this Court intends to allow the present application but with

certain stringent conditions and some reformatory measures so

that applicant may have a chance to reform himself and not

indulge in criminal activities therefore, it is hereby directed that

the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal

bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two

solvent sureties (each of Rs.25,000/-, out of them, one shall be

of local surety from Gwalior) to the satisfaction of trial Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of

the following conditions by the applicants :-

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;

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

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 them 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 be a source of embarrassment or

harassment to the complainant party in any manner and 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. Applicant would not be source of embarrassment

and harassment to the complainant party in any manner and

would not move in their vicinity.

8. As per the submission of complainant, if the

complaint of the complainant party (already filed alleging

extension of threat and coercion) is found true and offence is

registered against the applicant, then complainant shall be at

liberty to move application for cancellation of bail as per the

spirit of judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Aparna HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

Bhat Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2021 SCC Online 230.

9. The Station House Officer of the concerned Police

Station is directed as follows:

1. The Station House Officer shall inform the victim about the release of the petitioner/appellant on bail and shall also supply a copy of this bail order to the victim.

2. In case of breach of any of the conditions of this order, the victim shall be free to report the matter to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station.

3. On receipt of any such complaint from the victim, the Station House Officer of the concerned police station, in turn, shall inform the Registry of this Court.

4. On receipt of information from the Station House Officer as aforesaid, the Registry of this Court shall list this matter under caption "Directions" before the appropriate Bench.

lacaf/kr iqfyl Fkkus ds Fkkuk izHkkjh dks fuEukuqlkj vknsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd % 1- Fkkuk izHkkjh ihfM+r dks ;[email protected] ds tekur ij fjgkbZ ds rF; dks lwfpr djsxk rFkk tekur vkns'k dh ,d izfrfyfi Hkh miyC/k djk;sxkA 2- ;fn fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ vkns'k esa mfYyf[kr HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

'krksZa dk mYya?ku gksrk gS rks ihfM+r mDr rF; ds laca/k esa Fkkuk izHkkjh dks lwfpr djus ds fy, Lora= jgsxkA 3- ;fn fdlh izdkj dh ,slh f'kdk;r Fkkuk izHkkjh dks ihfM+r }kjk izkIr gksrh gS rks og rqjar bldh lwpuk bl jftLVªh dks miyC/k djk,xkA 4- tSlk fd mfYyf[kr gS] Fkkuk izHkkjh dh ,slh lwpuk izkfIr ds nkSjku jftLVªh ;g ekeyk rqjar ekUkuh; U;k;ky; ds le{k fn'kk funsZ'k ds rgr izLrqr djsxhA

9. ,rn~ }kjk ;g funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkosnd 5 ikS/kksa

dk ¼;FkklaHko dksbZ Hkh Qy nsus okys isM+ vFkok [email protected]

tSls isM+½ jksi.k djsxk rFkk mls vius vkl iM+ksl esa isM+ksa dh lqj{kk

dh O;oLFkk djuh gksxh rkfd ikS/ks lqjf{kr jg ldsA vkosnd dk ;g

drZO; gS fd u dsoy ikS/kksa dks yxk;k tk,s] cfYd mUgsa iks"k.k Hkh fn;k

tk,A ^^o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gSA^^ vkosnd

laHkor% 6&8 QhV ÅWaps ikS/[email protected]+ksa dks 3&4 QhV xM~<k djds

yxk;sxk rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr

djus ds fy,] vkosnd dks fjgk fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds

Hkhrj lacaf/kr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k o`{[email protected]/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh

QksVks çLrqr djuk gksxsaA rRi'pkr~] fopkj.k ds lekiu rd gj rhu

eghus esa vkosnd ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k izxfr fjiksVZ HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

çLrqr dh tk,xh A

o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk drZO; gS

D;ksafd i;kZoj.k {kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky;

vuqikyu ds ckjs esa vkosnd }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks

utj vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA blfy, vkosnd dks isM+ksa dh çxfr

vkSj vkosnd }kjk vuqikyu ds laca/k esa ,d fjiksVZ çLrqr djus ds fy,

funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vkonsd }kjk fd;s x;s vuqikyu dh ,d

la{kfIr fjiskVZ bl U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rhu ekg esa ¼vxys N%

eghuksa ds fy,½ j[kh tk;sxh ftls fd ^^funsZ'k^^ 'kh"kZ ds varxZr j[kk

tk,xkA

o`{kkjksi.k esa ;k isM+ksa dh ns[kHkky esa vkosnd dh vksj ls dh xbZ

dksbZ Hkh pwd vkosnd dks tekur dk ykHk ysus ls oafpr dj ldrh gSA

vkosnd dks viuh ilan ds LFkku ij bu ikS/[email protected] dks jksius

dh Lora=rk gksxh] ;fn og bu jksis x;s isMksa dh Vªh xkMZ ;k ckM+

yxkdj j{kk djuk pkgrk gS] rks og vius Loa; ds O;; ij ;g djus

ds fy;s Lora= gksxkA

bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj

ij fn, x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj]

l`tu ,oa izd`fr ds lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL;

LFkkfir fd;k tk ldsA orZeku esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Sonu Mirza Vs. State of M.P.)

vax ds :i esa n;k] lsok] izse ,oaa d:a.kk dh izd`fr dks fodflr

djus dh vko';drk gS D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh ewyHkwr

izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk

iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA

^^;g iz;kl dsoy ,d o`{k ds jksi.k dk iz'u u gksdj cfYd

,d fopkj ds vadqj.k dk gSA^^

;g funsZ'k vkosnd ds }kjk Lor% O;Dr dh xbZ lkeqnkf;d lsok dh bPNk ds dkj.k fn;k x;k gS tks LoSfPNd gSA

10. It is expected from the applicant that he shall submit

photographs by downloading the mobile application (App)

prepared at the instance of High Court for monitoring the

plantation through satellite/Geo- Tagging.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned

for compliance, if possible, for the office of this Court.

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

(Anand Pathak) Judge Anil* ANIL KUMAR Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh,

CHAURASI 2.5.4.20=8512f40a1a9eaa50b6802d068b51dae27e84 c266b09d283f0799e67cdc7df50f, cn=ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA Date: 2021.08.27 15:02:11 -07'00'

YA