Badshah Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6120 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

Gwalior, Dated : 28.9.2021

Shri Manish Nayak, Counsel for the applicant.

Shri Koshlendra Singh Tomar, Counsel for the State.

Case diary is available

This first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been

filed for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 05.02.2021 in connection

with Crime No.60/2021 for offence under Sections 307, 353, 332,

186, 147, 48, 149. Further added Section 333 of IPC and 25/27 of

Arms Act.

It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that applicant

is in jail for the last more than six months. The Trial is likely to take

sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or

tempering with prosecution witnesses and in view of criminal

antecedents, he is ready to abide by any stringent condition which

may be imposed by the Court.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

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

criminal history and 18 more criminal cases have been registered

against him, but it is clear from the judgment dated 5.11.2015 passed

by JMFC, Morena in Criminal Case No.2430/20212, the applicant

had destroyed the mustard crop of the complainant by driving the

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

tractor through his field which was filled with sand extracted from

Chambal River. Thus, it is submitted that it is clear that applicant is

involved in illegal excavation and illegal transportation of sand from

the area at least from the year 2012. It is submitted that inspite of the

criminal antecedents, he has not improved and he is still involved in

illegal excavation as well illegal transportation of sand which is not

only causing serious damage to the ecological balance of the area,

but it also shows that applicant has no respect for the law. It is

further submitted that infact 18 more criminal cases have been

registered against the applicant which clearly shows that whenever

he was released on bail, he misused the liberty.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

The Supreme Court in the case of Jayant and Ors. v. State of

M.P. reported in (2021) 2 SCC 670 has considered the adverse affect of

illegal excavation of sand on the ecological balance of the area. F urther

from the judgment dated 5.11.2015, it is clear that at least from the

year 2012, the applicant is involved in illegal excavation and illegal

transportation of sand. Under these circumstances, the applicant

cannot be released on bail, except on stringent condition which may

keep the applicant away from committing offences.

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

case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

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."

The co-accused persons have been granted bail on furnishing

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

cash surety of Rs. 3,00,000/-. Accordingly considering the totality of

facts and circumstances of the case 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. 6,00,000 (Rs. Six Lacs) or in the

alternative on depositing original titled-deed(s) [ not Rin Pustika] of

the immovable property worth more than Rs.6,00,000/- as directed

by the Supreme Court in the case of Sharo @ Sharukh Vs. The

State of M.P. by order dated 6/9/2021 passed in SLP (Cri.) No.

6321/2021 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.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

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

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.48485/2021 Badshah Gurjar v. State of M.P.

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.

With aforesaid observations, this application is Allowed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge ar

ABDUR Digitally signed by ABDUR RAHMAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya

RAHMAN Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=d604b5a66b413c436e6af99c6fe547304e1bc26 d2b510cc133f1b56faa63e77b, cn=ABDUR RAHMAN Date: 2021.09.28 17:52:21 -07'00'