Ruby Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5629 MP

        THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                 M.Cr.C. No. 46080/2021
               Rubi Pandey vs. State of MP

Gwalior, Dated : 17/09/2021

      Shri Divyansh Singh, counsel for the applicant.

      Shri C.P. Singh, 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.43/2021 registered at Police Station Daboh Distt. Bhind for

offence under Section(s) 376 (2) (1), 376 (D), 506 of I.P.C.

      It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant, that according

to the prosecution case the co-accused Amit Tiwari had committed

rape on prosecutrix on the false promise of marriage. It is alleged that

in the month of second half of December, 2020, when the prosecutrix

went to the house of co-accused Amit Tiwari, then applicant and her

husband was also present there. It is submitted that except the above-

mentioned allegation, there is nothing against the applicant to show

that the applicant has ever assisted or instigated co-accused Amit

Tiwari to commit rape on the prosecutrix. It is further submitted that

husband of applicant/co-accused Satish Pandey has already been

granted anticipatory bail by order dated 13.05.2021 passed in

M.Cr.C. No.23219/2021. The applicant is ready and willing to co-

operate in the investigation. The Trial is likely to take sufficiently
            THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    M.Cr.C. No. 46080/2021
                  Rubi Pandey vs. State of MP

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
            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
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  M.Cr.C. No. 46080/2021
                Rubi Pandey vs. State of MP

           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

24.09.2021

and furnishes her personal bond in the sum of Rs.

1,00,000 (Rs. One Lac) to the satisfaction of the investigating

officer, then he shall be released on bail. 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 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 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 46080/2021 Rubi Pandey vs. State of MP

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 2021.09.17 17:07:22 +05'30'