Shyam Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 14634 MP

                                                1
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                           AT JABALPUR
                                                 BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
                                      ON THE 11th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 46970 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SHYAM SINGH S/O SHRI CHETRAM SINGH,
                           AGED    ABOUT   50  YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                           LABOUR, R/O VILLAGE THAPUL POLICE
                           STATION      BIHARIGADH       DISTRICT
                           SAHARANPUR U.P.

                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI BRIJENDRA KUMAR VAISHYA, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                           POLICE STATION BAHARI DISTRICT SIDHI
                           (MADHYA PRADESH).

                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI L.A.S. BAGHEL, DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 46972 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           DUSHYANT CHAMAR S/O SHRI PRITHVI
                           CHAMAR,    AGED  ABOUT  40  YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGE THAPUL
                           POLICE STATION BIHARIGADH DISTRICT
                           SAHARANPUR U.P.

                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI BRIJENDRA KUMAR VAISHYA, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                           POLICE BAHARI DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA
                           PRADESH).

                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI L.A.S. BAGHEL, DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: RAGHVENDRA
SHARAN SHUKLA
Signing time: 11/12/2022
11:56:07 AM
                                                               2
                                 This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                               ORDER

These are first applications on behalf of the applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 766/2021 registered at Police Station Bahari, District Sidhi for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 370, 370-A, 376(2)(n), 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been made accused only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused. According to him, the memorandum is not admissible in law and therefore any person made accused mainly on the basis of memorandum is entitled to be granted the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. In support of his contention, counsel has relied upon a judgment rendered in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakh Ansari and other s reported in (2013) 12 SCC 17.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State has opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that it is not a case in which the involvement of the applicants is confined only to the statement made in the memorandum but there are other corroboratory material also indicating that the applicants are very much involved in the crime. He submits that in view of the statement made in the memorandum, it is clear that the present applicants were involved in the alleged crime and were the active Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 11/12/2022 11:56:07 AM

members of the gang who was operating such shameful illegal activities. He submits that applicants are involved in purchasing and selling the girls. He submits that a girl was sold to applicants Shyam Singh and Dushyant Chamar and out of the consideration Shyam Singh paid Rs. 10,000/- as advance money and later the said girls was got married to the brother of Dushyant. The statement of the girl under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded. Counsel further submits that the applicants have not been arrested so far and the corroboratory material indicating the active involvement of the applicants can be ascertained only after their arrest. He submits that under such circumstances the applicants cannot be granted the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the case diary. From perusal of the case diary prima- facie it is clear that the applicants are involved in illegal activities of purchasing and selling the girls, human trafficking and rape, and the investigation is going on and the corroborative material establishing involvement of the applicants in the crime is required to be collected, therefore looking to the gravity of offence, which is alleged against the present applicants, I am not inclined to consider this application and grant benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the applicants. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE RAGHVENDRA

Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAGHVENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 11/12/2022 11:56:07 AM