Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Munni Devi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 March, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 MCRC-10526-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-10526-2021
(SMT. MUNNI DEVI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
2
Gwalior, Dated : 01-03-2021
Shri D.S.Kushwah, counsel for the applicant.
Shri B.S.Gaur and Shri Narottam Sharma, Pl for the respondent/State.
This is second bail application u/S.438 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant
for grant of anticipatory bail. .
The applicant is apprehending her arrest by Police Station Mehgaon
district Bhind in connection with Crime No.02 of 2020 registered in relation to
the offence punishable u/S.302 and 34 of IPC.
I t is submitted by counsel for the applicant that although first
application of the applicant being M.Cr.C.no.1949 of 2021 was dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 20.1.2021 with liberty to surrender and apply for
regular bail but again this second application for the same purpose is being
filed taking aid of judgment rendered by coordinate Bench of this court in the
case of Balvir Singh Bundela Vs. State of M.P. passed in
M.Cr.C.No.5621 of 2020. It is alleged that there is no allegation against the
present applicant for commission of offence. It is argued that initially, the
deceased was examined at BIMR Hospital, wherein, no injury on her head
was reported by the doctors. Thereafter, she was shifted to JAH Hospital
where, she was admitted with respect to injury to brain stem infarct. It is
pointed out that until the treatment is given by BIMR Hospital, the doctors
have not opined anything regarding any injury on the head of the deceased.
Subsequently in the Postmortem report, it was shown that the deceased had
expired owing to head injury. On 24.2.2021, when specific query was put to
State counsel to point out the document of BIMR Hospital from the case
diary, it was submitted that the documents are not available in the case diary.
This court had directed the State counsel to call for the medical documents
from the BIMR Hospital and the investigating officer was directed to explain
2 MCRC-10526-2021
as to why, these documents are not enclosed with the case diary. Today, the
State counsel has argued that the documents were well available in the case
dairy on 24.2.2021 except the document of referring the patient to the JAH
Hospital Gwalior. Aforesaid document is of discharge summery of the
patients pointing out that he was admitted on 16.11.2019 and discharged on
18.11.2019 and the diagnosis is given as brain stem infarct with
unconsciousness. Loss of conciseness and breathing difficulty are the
reasons for admission. Counsel for the State could not give any reason that
why when the documents were available in the case dairy why they were not
pointed out to the court on 24.2.2021. The cause of death is shown to be
cardio respiratory failure due to head injury. The death is shown to be 20 to
26 hours and is mentioned to be homicidal in nature. The document of
BIMR hospital shows that she was admitted on 16.11.2019. The initial
examination of the deceased was reported to be loss of consciousness and
breathing difficulty and in the heading of external injuries, it was found that no
external injury is present. The patient was referred to the JAH Hospital,
where she expired on 19.11.2019 at 2.40 PM. The injuries which were shown
in the Postmortem report are as under :
(i). Abrasion present over right side forehead 4 CM above right eye
brow size 3X2 CM;
(ii). Cut wound present over left cheek size .5 CM skin deep;
(iii). Rail pattern contusion present over emtino lateral aspect of right
arm 8 CM above left elbow upper end medially oblique in shape size 9X3
CM;
iv. Rail pattern contusion present over anterior lateral aspect of right
thigh 12 CM above right knee transversely in size 12X3 CM;
v. Contusion present over lateral aspect of left lower leg 15 CM below
left knee size 6X4 CM;
vi. Multiple abrasion present over dorsum aspect of right finger
various in size and shape size 1X1 cm to 1.5X1 CM;
3 MCRC-10526-2021
From perusal of the Postmortem report, it is apparent that there are six
injuries on the body of deceased including abrasion present over right side
of forehead 4 CM above right eyebrow whereas, doctors of BIMR Hospital
had reported that no external injury was seen on the body of deceased. State
counsel on 24.2.2021 has categorically argued that no such documents are
available in the case diary. Why and how the aforesaid documents are made
part of the case diary at the subsequent date as it had been pointed out by the
State counsel earlier that there is no such document available in the case
diary, no explanation to the aforesaid is submitted by the counsel for the
State. Earlier counsel Shri Gaur was called in the court and he has submitted
that some documents were available in the case diary except the document
which is the discharge summery of the deceased. Surprising to see that on the
earlier occasion, Shri Gaur has categorically stated about non availability of
these documents in the case diary and today, he says that said documents are
available in the case diary. Incorrect statements are being given before the
court and the incomplete case dairies are being sent by the authorities to the
AG office. Aforesaid fact appears to be a matter of inquiry.
In such circumstances, Superintendent of Police Bhind is directed to
inquire into the matter with respect to the aspect that as to why incomplete
case dairies are being sent to the AG office suppressing material documents
and submit the report before the court within a period of 15 days.
As there is injury on the head of deceased as reflected in the
Postmortem report including other injuries which are reported to be
antemortem in nature, this court is not inclined to grant benefit of anticipatory
bail to the applicant.
This application is therefore, rejected.
CC as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Rks
RAM KUMAR SHARMA
2021.03.03 17:33:55 +05'30'
4 MCRC-10526-2021
