Shainki @ Pawan Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5121 MP

          HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
                  BENCH AT GWALIOR
                            1
                  M.Cr.C. No. 43487/2021
        ( Shainki @ Pawan Tiwari Vs The State of M.P.)

Gwalior, dated : 07/09/2021
     Shri Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.

        Shri       P.P.S. Bajeeta, learned Public Prosecutor for the

respondent-state.

Shri Achut Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant.

Heard on IA No. 26481/2021, an application under Section

301(2) of the Cr.P.C.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed

and Shri Achut Sharma, learned counsel on behalf of the

complainant and his associate is permitted to assist the prosecution.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Case diary perused.

The applicant has filed this second application under section

439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Earlier first bail application was

dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 28/06/2021 passed in

M.Cr.C. No 30504/2021.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station- Morar

District- Gwalior (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.46/2020

registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 307,

498- A, 506, 379 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act.

Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that the

applicant who is the brother-in-law of the victim alongwith other co-

accused treated the victim with cruelty due to non-satisfaction of HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR

M.Cr.C. No. 43487/2021 ( Shainki @ Pawan Tiwari Vs The State of M.P.)

demand of one four wheeler car in dowry and harassed her

physically to the extent that the applicant alongwith other co-accused

hanged the victim from the fan and set her on fire, due to which,

victim received burnt injuries. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has

been registered against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is

brother in law of the complainant and has falsely been implicated in

the matter. He is in custody since 07/01/2021. It is submitted that

charge sheet has been filed and no further custodial interrogation is

required in the matter. Applicant was not present on the spot at the

time of incident. There is no escalation of offence to the higher

counts. Counsel for the applicant has relied on the judgment of Apex

Court in the case of Bhausheb Nagu Dharvare VS State of

Maharashtra and another, reported in (2001) 3 Crime 410 (SC).

This is second marriage of the complainant. First marriage was

broken and compromise was entered between them on taking money

by the complainant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in

view of outbreak of COVID-19, detention of applicant in already

congested prisons may be detrimental. Trial is held up due to

COVID-19 and the applicant cannot be kept in custody for an

unlimited period without any substantial reason. The applicant is

permanent resident of District- Gwalior (M.P.) and there is no

likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution

evidence. The applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR

M.Cr.C. No. 43487/2021 ( Shainki @ Pawan Tiwari Vs The State of M.P.)

conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid

submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made out

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State and counsel for the

complainant opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by

contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material

available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out and it is

submitted that applicant being brother in law and is main accused.

45% burnt injuries received by the complainant all over the body and

according to the dying declaration the main role played by present

applicant in the offence , therefore, prays for rejection of bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of

allegations levelled against the applicant and gravity of offence, this

court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

The second application, accordingly, stands dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge

Prachi*

PRACHI MISHRA 2021.09.09 10:21:28 +05'30'