Devesh Chourasiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1599 MP

                                    1
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                 MCRC No. 1344 of 2022
                (DEVESH CHOURASIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 04-02-2022
       Heard through Video Conferencing.

       Shri Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant.
       Shri Ankit Agrawal, learned G.A. for the respondent/State.

With the consent, finally heard.

This is first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No.252/2021 for the offences under

Sections 201, 274, 275, 308, 304, 420, 120-B, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 53 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, Section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, Section 65 of Information Technology Act and Section 5/13 M.P. Drug Control Act, 1949 registered at Police Station Omti, District Jabalpur. The applicant is in jail since 10.05.2021.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the similar Crime No.252/2021, the main accused Sarabjeet Singh Mokha has been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.56477/2021. The applicant is entitled for similar relief in view of principles of parity.

In addition Shri Pankaj Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the similar offences are registered against the applicant in State of Gujarat. The Gujarat High Court has also granted bail to this applicant for similar offences. Applicant will not tamper the evidence and material. He may be enlarged on bail.

Prayer is opposed by Shri Ankit Agrawal, learned Government Advocate.

This Court in M.Cr.C. No.56477 of 2021 recorded as under :-

"Indisputably the applicant'™s wife, son and Sonia Shukul are also co-accused. Despite recovery of injections from applicant'™s wife the High Court has granted her bail. The Sessions Court Morvi (Gujarat) in CMA No.9/2021 has recorded as under:

"œ4. Taking into consideration of the affidavit

submitted by the T.K official with the number 05 on behalf of the Government, the Learned Public Prosecutor, has argued that the applicant for this matter is the owner of City Civil Hospital and Research Centre Jabalpur, co-accused of said Hospital, co-accused Dilip Chorasia works in the medical department and the co- accused of this crime is Sapan S/o Shri Surendra Kumar Jain from Jabalpur is the wholesaler of medical related foods and medicines of Bhagwati Pharma in Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh and he himself trades in permanent medicines and surgical goods at the applicant's City Civil Hospital and Research Centre in Jabalpur so that the present applicant/accused and Devesh Chorasia S/o Dilip Chorasia are in contact so due to increasing demand of Remdesivir Injection, the applicant had ordered 500 units of Remdesivir injections through coaccused Devesh S/o Dilip Chorasia. Despite knowing that it is a duplicate injection co-accused Sunil Mishra from that total no. of 465 duplicate Remdesivir injections were given to co- accused Devesh Chorasia and despite knowing that these were duplicate injections total no. of 225 injections were given to the Doctors on duty in his hospital for treatment and illegal financial benefits were obtained and a total no. of 225 injections were destroyed when the crime was declared. And the applicant of this matter committed a serious crime by helping in this said crime. Also, the chargesheet of the crime against the applicant of the matter has been done and the co-accused of this matter is yet to be arrest. If the present applicant is released on bail under such circumstances, the accused will not be present during the trial, there is a possibility of fleeing, as well as the complainant intimidating witnesses, tampering with evidence, and committing such serious offences again. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the crime, the applicant has not been released on bail, such presentation is presented by the learned public prosecutor.

5. In this matter the representation of both the parties were taken into consideration. Considering the facts of the affidavit of the investigating officer submitted in his case from no.04, the applicant for this matter is the owner of the accused City Civil Hospital and Research Centre Jabalpur. And they have ordered 500 piece of Remdesivir Injections through co-accused Devesh S/o Dilip Chorasia who is working in the medical department of his hospital. So Sapan Jain has ordered 500 piece of duplicate Remdesivir injection from Co-accused Sunil Mishra and from that injections total no. of 465 duplicate Remdesivir injections had been given to co-accused Devesh S/o Dilip Chorasia and despite knowing that the

injections are duplicate he had given treatment and illegally received the economic profit. And when crime was declared total 225 injections were destroyed, and stated the truth that by helping in prior in said crime he has committed a serious crime.

However, in this case, the written statement from no.07 submitted by the applicant party in this matter with the list of documents alongwith the list of documentary evidence submitted with the number 08 and the invoice/bill in the documents alongwith the list should be taken into consideration. Whether the applicant/accused of this matter has obtained financial benefit by ordering total no.500 of duplicate Remdesivir injections through co-accused, cheating with infected patients of Corona, helping in crime and getting financial profit. As far as the evidence is concerned, at the present stage, apart from discussing the involvement of the applicant/accused in the offence or the merits and demerits of the case a well as the fact that the chargesheet of the said offence has been filed in the court here. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned above so there is reason to believe that if they are released on bail, they will not be able to escape anywhere and they will be present in the court on a regular basis during the trial. In view of all the above facts, in order to release the present applicant/accused on certain conditions and appropriate amount of bail, the following final order is made in the interest of justice under the present bail application.

Order:

1. Applicant/accused Surabjeet Singh Manjeet Singh Mokha Age 55 years, Religion Hindu, Occupation- Business, resides at: 112, Panch Pedhi, South Lines, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh) At present the applicant for obtaining regular bail for the first time after chargesheet under section 439 o RCP Act for the crime Morbi City "B" Division Police Station "ÂœA" part G.R No.0934/2021 (sessions case no.67/2021) section 274, 275, 308, 420, 34, 120-B, 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 304(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3,7,11 of the Essential Act and Section 53 of the Disaster Management Act and section 27 of the Drug and Cosmetic Act, is approved on the following conditions.

2. The applicant/accused have to present a reliable and trustworthy, local bail and Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand Only) to the court in the way that satisfy the conditions."Â​

23. The applicant is a permanent resident of Jabalpur. There is nothing on record to suggest that applicant can

flee from justice. Challan has already been filed. Custodial interrogation of applicant is no more required. The incriminating material has already been seized by the prosecution. There is nothing to suggest that applicant can influence or tamper the evidence. The bail can be cancelled if it is brought to the notice of this Court by filing appropriate application that applicant is influencing the witnesses.

24. In the judgments cited by learned Sr.Counsel for the applicant it was held that '˜bail, not jail' is the general principle. If necessary ingredients for grant of bail are satisfied, bail should be granted. In my view, as noticed above, the necessary ingredients for grant of bail are indeed available. Hence, I deem it proper to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

25. The applicant Sarabjeet Singh Mokha is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

26. It is also observed that if the applicant is found to be involved in any criminal activities, after his release on bail, then the present bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference to the Court and the State / prosecution will be free to arrest the accused in the present case also. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. The applicant shall surrender his passport before trial court and not leave the country without express permission granted by the trial court." It is not in dispute that present applicant is a co-accused in the same offence.

Considering the aforesaid, it is a fit case where principles of parity must be applied in view of present applicant. Moreso, Gujarat High Court has also granted him bail in similar offence.

The applicant Devesh Chourasiya is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction

of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

It is also observed that if the applicant is found to be involved in any criminal activities, after his release on bail, then the present bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference to the Court and the State / prosecution will be free to arrest the accused in the present case also. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. The applicant shall surrender his passport before trial court and not leave the country without express permission granted by the trial court.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. C.c. as per rules.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE

PK

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by PARITOSH KUMAR Date: 2022.02.04 16:59:29 IST