Pintu Yadav @ Sahdev vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5170 MP

                           1
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                   MCRC No.43231/2021
             (PINTU YADAV VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated : 08/09/2021

      Shri R.K.Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Shri A.K.Nirankari, learned counsel for the State.

      Case diary is available.

      The office has pointed out the following default:- (1) Legible

Copies (2) Cause title of the bail application number wrongly

mentioned.

      In the objection, the office has not pointed out the reasons for

mentioning that the bail application number has been wrongly

mentioned. Although, it is the case of the applicant that this

application is fourth application.

      Be that whatever it may be.

      The facts of the matter is that it is a repeat bail application. The

second bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn

by order dated 04/06/2021 passed in MCRC No.19818/2021 with

liberty to the applicant to revive the prayer after undergoing the actual

custody of six months. The third bail application was dismissed as

withdrawn     by   order   dated     19/07/2021    passed    in   MCRC

No.35301/2021 for the following reasons:-

             "It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant
      that earlier he was arrested on 29/3/2020 and was
      released on parole on 30/3/2020, i.e. on the next day. It
                                    2
       is further submitted that since the applicant did not
       surrender before the Court, accordingly, warrant of
       arrest was issued and now he is in jail from 31/1/2021.
       It is further submitted that since the applicant is not in
       a position to comply the stringent condition which
       may be imposed by this Court, therefore, he may be
       permitted to withdraw this application."
      This fourth repeat application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has

been filed for grant of bail.

      The applicant has been arrested on 11/01/2021 in connection

with Crime No.81/2020 registered at Police Station Umari, District

Bhind for offence under Section 379 of IPC.

      It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

applicant is the owner of the tractor-trolley, by which illegally

excavated sand was being transported in an illegal manner. Now, the

applicant is in jail for the last more than seven months and he has

learnt a lesson of not surrendering before the Trial Court after his

period of parole was over. In order to show his bona fides, now the

applicant is ready and and willing to abide by any stringent condition,

which may be imposed by the Court including that of furnishing cash

surety.

      Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

Counsel for the State. It is submitted that not only the applicant has a

criminal history and two more criminal cases have been registered

against him, but also it is clear that when he was released on parole,
                                  3
he did not surrender before the Court and, accordingly, warrant of

arrest was issued and ultimately, he was taken into custody on

11/01/2021

.

Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the

parties.

The Supreme Court by order dated 23-3-2020 passed in the

case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN

PRISONS in SUO MOTU W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 has directed all the

States to constitute a High Powered Committee to consider the release

of prisoners in order to decongest the prisons. The Supreme Court

has observed as under :

"The issue of overcrowding of prisons is a matter of serious concern particularly in the present context of the pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID - 19).

Having regard to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it has become imperative to ensure that the spread of the Corona Virus within the prisons is controlled. We direct that each State/Union Territory shall constitute a High Powered Committee comprising of (i) Chairman of the State Legal Services Committee, (ii) the Principal Secretary (Home/Prison) by whatever designation is known as, (ii) Director General of Prison(s), to determine which class of prisoners can be released on parole or an interim bail for such period as may be thought appropriate. For instance, the State/Union Territory could consider the release of prisoners who have been convicted or are undertrial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or less, with or without fine and the prisoner has been convicted for a lesser number of years than the maximum. It is made clear that we leave it open for the High

Powered Committee to determine the category of prisoners who should be released as aforesaid, depending upon the nature of offence, the number of years to which he or she has been sentenced or the severity of the offence with which he/she is charged with and is facing trial or any other relevant factor, which the Committee may consider appropriate."

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the

case, coupled with the fact that the applicant has misused his liberty

and has a criminal antecedents, the applicant can be granted bail only

on the stringent condition of furnishing cash surety, as well as

considering the fact that in view of second wave of Covid19

pandemic, it is also necessary to decongest the jail, and without

commenting on the merits of the case, it is directed that the applicant

be released on bail, on furnishing cash surety of Rs. 2,00,000 (Rs.

Two Lacs) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or C.J.M. or Remand

Magistrate (Whosoever is available). The applicant shall also furnish

an undertaking that he shall follow all the instructions which may be

issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration

(General or Specific) from time to time for combating Covid19.

The Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF

COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS by order dated 7-4-2020 has

directed as under :

In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to direct that Union of India shall ensure that all the prisoners having been released by the States/Union Territories are not left stranded and

they are provided transportation to reach their homes or given the option to stay in temporary shelter homes for the period of lockdown. For this purpose, the Union of India may issue appropriate directions under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 or any other law for the time being in force. We further direct that the States/Union Territories shall ensure through Directors General of Police to provide safe transit to the prisoners who have been released so that they may reach their homes. They shall also be given an option for staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of lockdown.

Accordingly, it is directed that before releasing the

applicant, the jail authorities shall get the applicant examined by

a competent Doctor and if the Doctor is of the opinion that his

Corona Virus test is necessary, then the same shall be conducted.

If the applicant is not found suspected of Covid19 infection or if

his test report is negative, then the concerned local administration

shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to

his house as per the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the

case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN

PRISONS (Supra) , and if he is found positive then the applicant

shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment

as per medical norms. The applicant is further directed to strictly

follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central

Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration for combating

Covid19. If it is found that the applicant has violated any of the

instructions (whether general or specific) issued by the Central

Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration, then this order shall

automatically lose its effect, and the Local Administration/Police

Authorities shall immediately take him in custody and would

send him to the same jail from where he was released. The

applicant is further directed to supply a copy of this bail order to

the police station having jurisdiction over his place of residence.

The other conditions of Section 437,439 Cr.P.C. shall remain

the same.

This order shall remain in force, till the conclusion of Trial. In

case of bail jump, or violation of any of the condition(s) mentioned

above, this order shall automatically lose its effect.

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 applicant shall automatically stand forfeited without any

reference to the Court.

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.

With aforesaid observations, this application is Allowed.

C.C. As per rules.

                                                                      (G.S. Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                                      Judge

         Digitally signed by
         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         Date: 2021.09.08
         17:16:07 -07'00'