Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nihal Singh Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 December, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 MCRC-59446-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC No. 59446 of 2021
(NIHAL SINGH GURJAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 10-12-2021
Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Purushottam Tanwar, learned PL for the respondent/State.
Shri Ranjeet Khanvilkar, learned counsel for the complainant.
Heard on I.A. No. 33053/2021, an application filed under Section
301(2) of Cr.P.C. for assisting State counsel.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed.
Shri Ranjeet Khanvilkar and his associates are permitted to assist State
counsel on behalf of complainant.
Also heard on bail application.
This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C filed
by the applicant for grant of bail.
T h e applicant has been arrested on 02.09.2021 by Police Station
Maharajpura, District Gwalior (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.86/2021
for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 456, 323, 336 & 376, 511/34
of IPC.
It is alleged that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He
has not committed any offence in any manner. Initially the offence under
Section 354, 456, 323, 336 of IC were lodged against the present applicant
and subsequently at the time of filing of charge sheet offence under Section
376 read with Section 511/34 of IPC has been added. Initially the police
authorities have issued notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. pointing out the
fact that they does not want to arrest the applicant only the participation and
investigation is required. He has complied with the notices issued to him and
gave full cooperation to the Investigating Officer in completion of the
investigation. There are no allegations that the applicant has not cooperated in
investigation but after investigation at the time of filing of charge sheet
suddenly an offence under Section 376 read with Section 511/34 of IPC has
2 MCRC-59446-2021
been added against the applicant. It is argued that he is ready to abide by all
the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He placed
reliance on the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. and another in Cr.A. No. 838/2021 decided
on 16.08.2021, wherein considering the fact that the authorities have given
the notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., wherein the applicant has actively
participated and cooperated in investigation and the Police Authorities have
found that there is no need to arrest him. All of sudden at the time of filing of
charge sheet, the sections have been increased and he has been taken into
custody. The action taken by the authorities in arresting the applicant is
contrary to the aforesaid judgment. He further placed reliance on the judgment
passed in Cr.A. 929/2021 ( Amandeep Singh Vs. CBI through Director),
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court considering the case of Sidharth
(Supra) has allowed the application vide order dated 02.09.2021. He has
further pointed out that there is some property dispute on which joint
agreement was entered into between the parties, which has filed alongwith the
application and owing to this property dispute just to create pressure a false
case has been registered against the present applicant. He he is ready to
abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He
prays for grant of bail.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State as well as counsel
for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer stating that there are
serious allegations against the present applicant of committing of offence,
which is clearly reflected in the FIR. Initially the offence under Section 376 of
IPC was not added but subsequently the offence 376 read with Section
511/34 of IPC is leveled against the applicant. Looking to the custody period,
they prays for rejection of application.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also
the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation in initial stage
and at the time of filing of charge sheet under Section 376 read with Section
3 MCRC-59446-2021
511/34 of IPC has been added and also considering the judgement by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharth (Supra), without
commenting upon the merits of the case, this application is allowed. The
applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety bond of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount 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;
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 involve any other offence, in case the
applicants indulge in any other criminal case the benefit of bail as extended by
this Court shall automatically cancelled.
5. 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 . If the applicant is found involved in any case except present one,
his bail shall stand rejected without any reference to the Court;
8. The applicant will inform the concerned S.H.O. of concerned
Police Station about his residential address in the said area and it would be
the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of
concerned police station as well as Superintendent of Police concerned who
shall inform the concerned SHO regarding the same.
4 MCRC-59446-2021
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
neetu
NEETU
SHASHANK
2021.12.13
15:02:18
+05'30'
