Kamlesh Chauhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 57 MP

                                                                1                          MCRC-45830-2021
                                       The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                               MCRC No. 45830 of 2021

(KAMLESH CHAUHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 03-01-2022

Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant

Kamlesh Chauhan S/o Umrao Singh Chauhan.

Shri Rajeev Kumar Pandey, learned Panel Lawyer for the non- applicant/State.

Shri Pradeep Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the objector.

This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code o f Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of applicant, who is in custody since 27.5.2021 in connection with Crime No.174/2021 registered at Police Station Betul Bazar, District Betul for the offence under Sections 302 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

I t is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Complainant Ram Kumar Gauraiya lodged the F.I.R on 27.5.2021 at

about 10:00 pm that he had visited the house of his sister when his wife informed him on mobile that there is sound of altercation coming from the ground-floor and asked him to immediately come back to his house. While on his way back, he saw Kamlesh Chauhan on his motorcycle exhorting "Maar Diya-Maar Diya" and Kamlesh Chauhan thereafter fled away from the spot. When complainant reached home, he saw his brother lying in front of door of front room in a critical condition. The sole eye-witness to the incident is Preeti, whose statements have been recorded by the police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C after fifteen days of the incident. There is no other eye-

Signature Not Verified witness to the incident and the whole story is a subsequent SAN

Digitally signed by AMIT JAIN Date: 2022.01.04 19:40:31 IST 2 MCRC-45830-2021 development. Though as per prosecution case, injuries were caused by an axe wielded by the present applicant but all the injuries on the body of the deceased were in the form of lacerated wounds and there are no incised wounds to corroborate causing of any injury with sharp edged weapon like an axe. Investigation is complete. Charge sheet has

already been filed. Trial will take time for its conclusion. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant places reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Dataram Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (2018) 3 SCC 22 wherein the ratio of law is that there is a need for humane approach while dealing with applications for remanding matter to police or judicial custody. Overcrowding in jails due to non-adherence to basic principles of criminal jurisprudence regarding grant of bail and presumption of innocence have been criticized and it is held that the judges should have a judicious and humane approach in the matter. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation (2012) 1 SCC 40 wherein it is held that bail ought not to be denied to teach lesson to a person whose offence is yet to be proved. Conditional bail is a solution and that should be adhered to and conditional bail should be granted to the applicant. Hence, prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant/State as well as learned counsel for the objector oppose the bail application and submit that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will threaten the witnesses and will not allow them to lead their evidence. Complainant is a witness of last seen and axe has been recovered from the Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by AMIT JAIN Date: 2022.01.04 19:40:31 IST 3 MCRC-45830-2021 possession of the present applicant. There is opinion of Dr.Monkia Soni from District Hospital, Betul, who has categorically opined that cause of death is shock and injury to vital organ i.e brain, which is homicidal in nature and the duration is within 24 hours. In query report, the medical officer Dr.Monika Soni has opined that on the seized axe, contained dried blood stains and the injuries which were found on the body of the deceased could have been caused with the said axe.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on record merely because there is some delay in

recording the statement of main eye-witness, who has taken the name of present applicant or there being no incised wound on the body of the deceased as is deciphered from the postmortem report, it is evident that the incident took place on 27.5.2021 at about 00.05 hours. Dehati Nalisi was recorded on the same day at 2.30 hours. There is mention of the name of accused by the complainant, who had seen the accused while returning from the house of his elder sister Babita Thakur. There is sufficient corroborative evidence which when tested in the light of the law laid down in the cases of Dataram Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (supra) and Sanjay Chandra versus Central Bureau of Investigation (supra) does not call for any interference for grant of any bail till important prosecution witnesses are examined in the Court of law.

Accordingly, this bail application fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE

amit Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by AMIT JAIN Date: 2022.01.04 19:40:31 IST