Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Desai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 December, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 6 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 50129 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
RAJESH DESAI S/O VALLABH DESAI, AGED ABOUT 59
YEAR S, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O PATMA GALI,
AGAR, PS AGAR, DISTRICT AGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI SYED ASIF ALI WARSI - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PS
KOTWALI AGAR MALWA, DISTRICT AGAR MALWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....NON APPLICANT
(BY SHRI SANTOSH THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
(SHRI SOMESH GOBHUJ - ADVOCATE FOR THE OBJECTOR)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. This is the first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is apprehending his arrest
in connection with Crime No.665/2023 registered at P.S. - Agar Malwa, District
Agar Malwa (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 323,
332, 452, 294, 506, 455, 459 of IPC and Section 3/4 of M.P. Doctors and
Associated Medical Care People Security Act, 2008.
2. As per the prosecution story, on 13.10.2023 at about 11.15 A.M. when
complainant-Dr. Shashank Saxena who is an Ophthalmologist was talking with
Civil Surgeon Dr. Paliwal in the office, at that time present applicant forcibly
entered into the room of Civil Surgeon and asked the Dr. Paliwal that when will
he provide the information regarding the RTI application. He abused them in
filthy language and also said that Dr. Shashank Saxena is a traitor and threatened
him for life. Applicant started scuffle with the complainant and hit upon his
chest by fist and also caused injury to the complainant by using some sharp
cutting weapon. Accordingly offence has been registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. Complainant is posted at Agar
since 2011 and he has not been transferred. Applicant is a RTI Activist and he
has filed so many applications under the RTI at District Hospital, Agar and in
compliance of the order passed by the appellate authority, he was present in the
cabin of Dr. Paliwal and at that time complainant was also present there and he
got angry and started quarreling with the applicant and tried to assault applicant.
It is proved by the enquiry report which was conducted by a team of
government doctors. Complainant is posted in the District Hospital, Agar and
using his influence he has fabricated x-ray report mentioning a fracture. Final
conclusion of trial will take considerable long time. Hence, he prays that the
applicant be released on anticipatory bail.
4. Per-contra, learned GA for respondent/State opposes the anticipatory
bail application and prays for its rejection.
5. Counsel for the objector also opposes the anticipatory bail application
and prays for its rejection by submitting that the applicant is a habitual offender
and regularly doing this type of work against the various persons for ulterior
motive to extort money from them. So many complaints have been registered
against the applicant. The matter has been already decided by the department
vide order dated 24.9.2019 by which proceeding was initiated against him and it
has already been closed. The said act has been done within the government
hospital with an on-duty government doctor, which itself is a serious crime.
Applicant is tampering the evidence and threatening the witnesses. Hence, he
prays that the applicant does not deserve for anticipatory bail.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as
well as the impugned order of the court below.
7. Considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments
advanced by both the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also the fact
that applicant himself admits his presence and scuffle with the complainant in
the cabin of the CMHO, Agar Malwa at the time of incident. Section 457 of IPC
is included later on, which is an offence triable by the JMFC. One of the
criminal record has been found against the present applicant. Offence has been
done in the premises of the District Hospital and within the cabin of CMHO.
Therefore, looking to the nature of allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the applicant.
8. Hence, this M.Cr.C. is dismissed.
9. However, concerning police authorities are directed to ensure the
necessary compliance of judgment dated 31.7.2023 passed by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.2207/2023 (Mohd. Ashfaq Alam Vs. State
of Jharkhand and others) regarding applicability of the provisions of Section 41
of Cr.P.C.
C.C. as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
trilok
