Arjun Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6068 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Gwalior dtd. 27/09/2021

Shri Akhand Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri Kaushlendra Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the State.

Case diary is available.

This fifth repeat bail application filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 30/07/2020 in connection

with Crime No.01/2020 registered by Police Station Amayan,

District Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A

and 201 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

applicant is the father-in-law aged about 59 years and he was

arrested on 30/07/2020 and by order dated 07/06/2021 passed in

MCRC No.23751/2021, he was granted temporary bail for a period

of two months and he has surrendered one day prior to expiry of the

said period of temporary bail.

By referring to the order-sheets of the Trial Court, it is

submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the prosecution

witnesses are not deliberately turning up. The attention of this Court

was drawn towards the order-sheet dated 07/04/2021, according to

which the prosecution witness was served but in spite of that they

did not appear. Similarly, on 08/04/2021, the prosecution witness

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Ranjana Devi did not appear in spite of the fact that she was served

with summons. It is further submitted that on 24/08/2021 none

appeared and again the summons were issued. On 16/09/2021, the

prosecution witness Ranjana Devi did not appear in spite of the fact

that the summons were served. Accordingly, it is submitted that the

prosecution witnesses are deliberately avoiding appearing before

the Trial Court. The applicant has remained in jail for

approximately one year but there is no progress in the trial. Looking

to the hostile attitude of the prosecution witnesses in not appearing

before the Trial Court, there is every possibility that there would be

further delay in the trial. The applicant undertakes to stay away

from the prosecution witnesses and he would not tried to tamper the

prosecution witness.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State. However, the counsel for the applicant could

not point out the reasons for absence of witness in spite of service

of summons.

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 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

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."

Since, prosecution itself is not interested in early disposal of

trial and the speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

the applicant is in jail approximately for more than one year and he

is the father-in-law and in spite of the fact that the allegations are

that the deceased was died without giving any information to the

parents of the deceased, 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 a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. One

Lac) with one surety in the like amount 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 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 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

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

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

her 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 her 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 she 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

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.47862/2021 (ARJUN SINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)

automatically lose its effect, and the Local

Administration/Police Authorities shall immediately take her in

custody and would send her to the same jail from where she was

released. The applicant is further directed to supply a copy of

this bail order to the police station having jurisdiction over her

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.

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)
Pj'S/-                                                                       Judge


         Digitally signed by
         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         Date: 2021.09.27
         16:16:09 -07'00'