Shyamu Raghuwanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6566 MP

              THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      CRA-5880-2021
       Shyamu Raghuwanshi Vs. State of M.P. & Another

Gwalior, Dated : 20/10/2021

      Shri J.P. Mishra, counsel for the appellant.

      Shri C.P. Singh, counsel for the respondent No.1/ State.

None for the complainant.

Case diary is available.

It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the complainant

has been informed about the pendency of this appeal as required under

Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

This appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

against the order dated 02.09.2021 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities

Act) Vidisha, rejecting the bail application.

The appellant has been arrested on 22.08.2021 in connection

with Crime No.31/2015 registered by Police Station Nateran, district

Vidisha for offence punishable under Sections 294, 324, 506 of IPC

and Section 3 (1) (10) of SC/ST Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that appellant

was earlier granted bail and trial is pending since 2015. Earlier the

appellant did not appear before the trial Court on 25.02.2016 and was

rearrested on 09.04.2018. Thereafter, on 12.04.2019, again he did not

appear before the trial Court and was rearrested on 11.07.2019. It is

submitted that again on 29.01.2021, he did not appear before the trial THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-5880-2021 Shyamu Raghuwanshi Vs. State of M.P. & Another

court and he was rearrested on 22.08.2021. It is submitted that it is

true that the appellant has a criminal history and some more minor

offences were registered during the period when he did not appear

before the trial Court but now he has learned a lesson and he is in jail

from more than one and a half months. In view of his previous

conduct and criminal history, appellant is ready and willing to abide

by any stringent condition including that of furnishing cash surety.

The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and now there is no

possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.

Per contra, the appeal is opposed by the counsel for the State. It

is submitted that the appellant has a criminal history and as many as

11 more criminal cases were registered against him. However, after

going through the details of those criminal cases, it is fairly conceded

that most of the cases were registered under Sections 323, 327, 506,

294 of IPC.

Considering the conduct of appellant in remaining absent before

the trial Court as well as considering the criminal antecedents of the

appellant according to which 11 more criminal cases were registered

against him and mostly which are for offence under Sections 323, 294,

506, 327 of IPC as well as in view of the concessional statement made

by Shri Mishra that appellant is ready and willing to furnish cash

surety and without commenting on the merits of the case, the appeal is

allowed. It is directed that the appellant be released on bail on THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-5880-2021 Shyamu Raghuwanshi Vs. State of M.P. & Another

furnishing cash surety of Rs. 1,00,000 (Rs. One Lac) or in the

alternative on depositing original title-deed(s) [not Rin Pustika] of the

immovable property worth of more than the said amount, as directed

by the Supreme Court in the case of Sharo @ Shahrukh vs. The

State of M.P. by order dated 6.9.2021 passed in SLP (Cri.)

No.6321/2021 to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court

to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.

It is made clear that single default in appearance before the Trial

Court, or in case of registration of new offence, this bail order shall

automatically come to an end and the cash surety so furnished by the

appellant shall automatically stand forfeited without any reference to

the Court.

This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in

case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the

case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18.3.2021 in

Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of bail

be sent to the complainant.

Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge

Aman AMAN TIWARI 2021.10.20 18:35:37 +05'30'