Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6257 MP
Judgement Date : 30 September, 2021
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mcrc.47569/2021
Munnalal Sharma v. State of M.P.
Gwalior, Dated : 30.9.2021
Shri Santosh Agarwal, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri Naval Gupta, 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 his arrest in connection with Crime
No.561/2021 registered at Police Station Thatipur Distt. Gwalior
for offence under Section(s) 406, 420 of I.P.C.
It is submitted by Shri Agarwal that in fact the applicant
himself is the victim of misdeeds of one Rani. The allegations are
that co-accused Rani entered into an agreement to sell her property to
complainant and an agreement to sell was executed. It is also alleged
that an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was taken by Rani from the
complainant by way of advance. But, instead of executing the sale
deed in favour of the complainant, it is alleged that Rani sold the
property to the applicant. It is submitted that applicant himself is a
bona fide purchaser from Rani. There is no allegation that he in any
manner had cheated the applicant. The applicant is ready and willing
to cooperate with the investigating officer. The Trial is likely to take
sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or
tempering with prosecution witnesses.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the
2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mcrc.47569/2021
Munnalal Sharma v. State of M.P.
Counsel for the State. However, it is fairly conceded that according
to the prosecution, the original owner Rani, after entering into an
agreement to sell with the complainant, sold the property to the
applicant. It is further submitted that at present there is nothing on
record to indicate that the applicant had in any manner cheated the
complainant.
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
3
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mcrc.47569/2021
Munnalal Sharma v. State of M.P.
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 fact 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
7.10.2021
and furnishes his 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
above, this order shall automatically lose its effect.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Mcrc.47569/2021 Munnalal Sharma v. State of M.P.
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 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: 2021.09.30 15:26:37 -07'00'
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!