Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rinku Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 February, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 5607/2022
(RINKU SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Through Video Conferencing
Gwalior, Dated : 03/02/2022
Shri Arun Barua, Counsel for applicant.
Shri R.K. Awasthi, Counsel for State.
Case diary is available.
This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for
grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 01.09.2019 in connection
with Crime No.198/2014 registered by Police Station - Dimni, District
Morena for offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 506-B, 34 of
IPC.
This is a case of bail jump. According to the rejection order, the
applicant did not appear before the trial Court on 20.04.2018 and on
18.03.2021
, Counsel for applicant filed an application before the Trial
Court, mentioning that the applicant is detained in Shadol Jail, and
therefore, he be requisitioned by production warrant. Accordingly, on
23.11.2021, the applicant was produced before the Trial Court in
execution of production warrant.
The applicant has filed a copy of arrest memo as Annexure A-2
and projected that in fact the applicant was arrested in another case
and he was not absconding. It is submitted by Counsel for the
applicant that the applicant was arrested on 01.09.2019 in criminal
case under 302 of IPC which was committed prior to absence of the
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 5607/2022
(RINKU SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
applicant on 20.04.2018.
The submission made by Counsel for the applicant is per-se
misleading and contrary to the documents filed by himself. The
applicant has filed copy of arrest memo of the applicant in crime
No.85/2018, according to which the said FIR was registered on
11.05.2018 i.e. subsequent to 20.04.2018 when the applicant absented
himself from the Trial Court. Thus, it is clear that after absenting from
the Trial Court, the applicant again committed an offnece under
Section 302 of IPC. Furthermore, two more offences i.e. Crime
No.88/2018 and 174/2019 were committed by applicant. The applicant
was arrested in Crime No.85/2018 on 01/09/2019 and after remaining
absent from the Trial Court, in fact the applicant committed three more
offences including one heinous offence of Section 302 of IPC. Thus, it
is clear that the applicant has blatantly misused the liberty of bail
which was granted to him in the present case. From the rejection order,
it is clear that applicant has criminal history and as many as 13 more
criminal cases have been registered against him.
The present offence was registered in the year 2014. From the
criminal antecedents reflected in the rejection order, it is clear that one
offence under Section 376 of IPC, two offences under Section 307 of
IPC, three offences under Section 302 of IPC were registered apart
from offences under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act.
It is submitted by Counsel for the applicant that the applicant
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 5607/2022
(RINKU SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
has been acquitted in some of the offences and he has filed the copies
of the judgments passed by the Courts.
The first judgment which has been placed on record is for
offence under Sections 294, 323, 325, 147, 506 Part II of IPC and the
applicant was acquitted on the ground of compromise.
The second judgment is in relation to Crime No.22/2014 which
was registered under Section 34 (1)-A of M.P. Excise Act and in that
case also the applicant was acquitted on the ground that most of the
witnesses had turned hostile.
The third judgment is in relation to offence committed under
Section 379, 427 of IPC and in the said case also, he was acquitted on
the ground of compromise.
The fourth judgment is in relation to offence under Section 376
of IPC and Section 3 (1) (xii) of the SC/ST Act, in which he was
acquitted by order dated 04.10.2021 passed in SCATR
No.200091/2017 on the ground that the prosecutrix had turned hostile.
The fifth judgment is for the offence under Sections 353, 294,
506, 34 of IPC. In this case, the applicant was convicted because the
witnesses had not turned hostile.
Thus, the applicant has been acquitted in those cases in which
either the witnesses had turned hostile or they had entered into a
compromise and in one case where the witnesses did not turn hostile,
he has been convicted.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No. 5607/2022
(RINKU SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Thus, it is clear that the applicant appears to be a hardcore
criminal and he has committed number of offences after the year 2014
and even after absenting himself from the Trial Court, he is alleged to
have committed three more offences including one under Section 302
of IPC.
Under these circumstances, no case is made out for grant of bail.
The application fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Judge
Aman
AMAN TIWARI
2022.02.03
18:40:14 +05'30'
