Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mrs Saroj Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 September, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 44168/2021
Mrs. Saroj Parihar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Gwalior, Dated : 15/09/2021
Ms. Monica Mishra, counsel for applicant.
Shri A.K. Nirankari, counsel for the State.
Case diary is available.
This first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been
filed for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime
No.207/2021 registered at Police Station Bhander Distt. Datia for
offence under Section(s) 376, 450, 323, 294, 506 & 34 of I.P.C.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant, that according
to prosecution case, the husband of the applicant raped the
complainant on various occasions and thereafter when the conduct of
her husband was informed by the complainant to the applicant, then it
is alleged that the applicant scolded the complainant by saying that
she is trying to defame her husband and also assaulted her by kicks
and fists. It is submitted by counsel for applicant that there is no
allegation that the applicant in any manner was helping her husband
to commit rape or she was aware of the said fact. The only allegation
against the applicant is that when she was informed about the
conduct of her husband, then the applicant assaulted the complainant
by kicks and fists by alleging that she is trying to defame her
husband. It is submitted that even if the allegations against the
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 44168/2021
Mrs. Saroj Parihar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
applicant are accepted, the offence under Section 323 of IPC would
be made out which is bailable in nature. The applicant is a lady and in
fact she has been falsely implicated as it has been alleged by the
complainant that she was raped by the husband of the applicant. The
applicant is ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation. The
Trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility
of her absconding or tempering with prosecution case.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the
counsel for the State.
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
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 44168/2021
Mrs. Saroj Parihar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
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 allegations, as well as considering the
deteriorating situation in view of second wave of Covid19 pandemic,
and without commenting on the merits of the case, it is directed that
if the applicant appears before the Investigating officer on or before
22.09.2021
and furnishes her personal bond in the sum of Rs.
1,00,000 (Rs. One Lac) to the satisfaction of the investigating
officer, then she shall be released on bail. The applicant shall also
furnish an undertaking that she 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
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 44168/2021
Mrs. Saroj Parihar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Covid19.
The other conditions of Section 438 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.
In case, if the applicant fails to appear before the investigating
officer on the specified date, then this order shall lose its effect.
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.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Judge
Aman
AMAN TIWARI
2021.09.15
17:35:34 +05'30'
