Rohit Dhakad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1165 MP

                                  1
         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      Cr.A.No.1490/2021
         (Rohit Dhakad Versus State of M.P. and another )

Gwalior, Dated:-31.3.2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri S.S. Rajput, learned counsel for the appellant.

      Shri Naval Kishore Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor for the

respondent/State.

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A)(2) of

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989 against the order dated 24.2.2021 passed by Special Judge,

Guna, whereby the application of the appellant under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail has been rejected in connection with

Crime No.123/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali Guna for the

offence punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and

section 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s) and 3 (2) (V,A) of Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

It is submitted by counsel for the appellant that the appellant

has been falsely implicated in the case and he has not committed any

offence in any manner. It is alleged that as per the prosecution story

the incident is an outcome of some dispute while playing cricket.

Initially there were no allegation with respect to using the words by

caste. Only injuries were inflicted which were found to be minor in

nature, therefore, the police authorities have already released them on

bail, considering the fact that the punishment was less than seven

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.1490/2021 (Rohit Dhakad Versus State of M.P. and another )

years. Subsequently at the time of filing of charge-sheet, they have

again filed an application under section 438, but the same has been

rejected by the Trial Court pointing out the fact that there is specific

bar under section 18 of the SCST Act. It is argued that the statements

were recorded after 11 days, wherein the allegation of using words

regarding caste are being mentioned by the complainant which were

initially absent from the complaint. Learned counsel further submits

that the appellant is the first offender. He is ready to abide with all the

terms and conditions which may be imposed by this court and placing

reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of

Atendra Singh Rawat Vs. State of M.P. in Cr.A.No.7295/2018

dated 11.10.2018 and submitted that the present appeal is

maintainable. He prays for grant of anticipatory bail pointing out the

fact that no offence under SCST Act is made out.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the appeal

stating that there are specific allegation of inflicting injuries which are

medically corroborated, but he fairly admits the fact that iniitally there

was no allegation of use of words regarding caste in the initial

complaint. He gave his statement which was recorded after 11 days.

Appellant is the first offender is also not disputed.

Consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case

and placing reliance upon the judgment of Atendra Singh Rawat

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.1490/2021 (Rohit Dhakad Versus State of M.P. and another )

(supra), this this Court deems it appropriate to allow this anticipatory

bail application. The appeal is allowed subject to verification of

the fact that there is no other criminal case is pending against the

appellant.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the appellant

shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety

of the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigation Officer/trial

Court, as the case may be with submission of written undertaking that

he will abide by the terms and conditions of different circulars, orders

as well as guidelines issued by 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 appellant :-

1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of

the bond executed by him;

2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the

case may be;

3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.1490/2021 (Rohit Dhakad Versus State of M.P. and another )

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 appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the

offence of which he is accused.

5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during

the trial; and

6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission

of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The appellant 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 learned counsel for the State to send E-copy

of this order to SHO of concerned police station as well as concerned

Superintendent of Police who shall inform the concerned SHO

regarding the same.

Appeal stands allowed and disposed of.

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

(Vishal Mishra) Judge Pawar*

ASHISH PAWAR 2021.04.01 13:37:07 +05'30'