Mohan Lal Dheemar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 8445 MP

                                                                         1                        M.Cr.C. No.59683-2021




                                                    THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                               M.Cr.C. No.59683/2021
                                                   (Mohan Lal Dheemar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

                                        Jabalpur, Dated 08.12.2021

                                                Shri Ashish Tiwari, counsel for the petitioner.
                                                Shri K.K. Agnihotri, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
                                                                             ORDER

Crime No. Under section Police Station Arrest Date 54/2021 364-A, 302, 307, Ladhora, 18.01.2020 147, 148, 149 of IPC District Tikamgarh and Section 25/27 of (M.P.) Arms Act

As declared by the petitioner, this is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner claimed parity with co-accused persons namely Balram Ahirwar & Vindravan Dheemar who have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.10249/2021.

3. The learned Panel Lawyer has fairly admitted that parity exists in favour of the petitioner.

4. The relevant portion of the order dated 29.11.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.10249/2021 reads as under -

"As declared by the petitioners, this is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 04.01.2001 a notified miscreant Bhagwan Singh Thakur and his gang kidnapped some persons. On receiving information, a battalion of SAF was sent for rescue. When confronted, both side started firing. Constable Shivdayal received bullet on the head and died. In a commotion kidnapped persons also tried to fled away but one of them Bhajanlal sustained a bullet injury fired by the miscreants. All the Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Date: 2021.12.09 17:17:21 IST

miscreants managed to escape from the spot. The police came back and registered present Crime No.54/2001 and started investigation. During the investigation the police arrested Bhagwan Singh, Santosh, Laxman, Gulab and Gajraj and filed charge sheet. They were tried and acquitted vide judgment dated 10.09.2004 passed in S.T. No.274/2001 by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh.

3. At the time of filing of the charge sheet co-accused Dhansingh, Premi Dhobi, Raghuveer Dheemar, Matadeen, Kalka Dheemar, Mohanlal Dheemar, Nanga @ Rajkumar Dheemar, and the present petitioners Balram Ahirwar and Binda @ Vindravan Dheemar s/o Ramdayal were declared absconding.

4. After about 20 years of the incidence the police have arrested them on 21.06.2020.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were not named in the FIR. No witness have named them in their police statements. There is no other evidence to show that they were present at the time of the incident. Nothing has been recovered from their possession. No Test Identification Parade has been conducted by the police after their arrest. A supplementary charge sheet has been filed against them which is pending trial. The incident has taken place 20 years back. So far witnesses cited by the prosecution in charge sheet are concerned they have left the place and have changed their place of abode. It is not possible to trace them and conclude the trial at an early stage. The petitioners were never absconding in the case. They were not even aware of the registration of cases against them. They were residing at their home place in the same village and have never left the village. The police have never contacted them or informed them about registration of the crime. They cannot be faulted with the delay caused in filing of the supplementary charge sheet. Besides, all the co-accused persons have been acquitted therefore, they be granted bail.

6. Vide order dated 26.10.2021 the same grounds were raised by the petitioners but the case was adjourned on the

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Date: 2021.12.09 17:17:21 IST

request of the Panel Lawyer that the case diary received in the office was incomplete and he was not in a position to reply or to rebut the grounds raised by the petitioner.

7. Today also the learned Panel Lawyer made the same statement. He referred to a report received from P.S. Lidhora District Tikamgarh dated 21.11.2021 to the effect that-

^^mijksDr izdj.k esa rkRdkyhu fujh{kd chvkj f}osnh Fkkuk izHkkjh fy/kkSjk ds }kjk Qjkj vkjksfi;ksa dks fdl lk{; ds vk/kkj ij vkjksih cuk;k x;k gS pwfd mijksDr izdj.k djhc 20 o"kZ iqjkuk gS ftlds laca/k esa izkIr ds'k Mk;jh ds vuqlkj Li"V mYys[k fd;k tkuk laHko ugh gSA vr% izdj.k esa Qjkj bZukeh vkjksih gksus ls mDr izdj.k esa Qjkj vkjksih eksgu firk ';kekyky <hej mez 60 lky fuoklh leFkj ftyk >kalh dks fnukad 18-01-20 ,oa c`Unkou firk jken;ky <hej fuoklh fNIkVk Fkkuk leFkj ftyk >klh m0iz0 dks fnukad 21-06-20 ,o cyjke firk VqMw vfgjokj fuoklh cqMsjk?kkV Fkkuk leFkj ftyk >kalh dks fnukad 12-08-20 dks fxj0 fd;k tkdj eku0 U;k;ky; is'k fd;k x;k gSA izfrosnu Jheku ds le{k lknj izLrqr gSA**

8- Looking to the aforesaid and on due consideration of facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Therefore, the petition is allowed."

5. Having regard to the submissions of the parties, the parity claimed by the petitioner and other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to release the present petitioner on bail, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed in the same terms as has been allowed in the case of Balram Ahirwar & Vindravan Dheemar.

6. It is directed that petitioner Mohan Lal Dheemar be released from custody on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Date: 2021.12.09 17:17:21 IST

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court as and when required further subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments on frivolous grounds to protract the trial.;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly allure or make any inducement, threat or promise to the prosecution witnesses, so as to dissuade him from disclosing truth before the Court;

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or involve in any criminal activity;

(iv) In case of his involvement in any other criminal activity or breach of any other aforesaid conditions, the bail granted in this case may also be cancelled.

(Virender Singh) Judge @shish

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Date: 2021.12.09 17:17:21 IST