Madhya Pradesh High Court
Muhammad Nishar Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 December, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
ON THE 20 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 15168 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. MUHAMMAD NISHAR KHAN S/O SHRI SHARIF
KHAN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
GOVT EMPLOYEE (TEACHER) VILLAGE
INDURKHI, TEHSIL RAUN DISTRICT BHIND M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. MUHID KHAN S/O SHRI MULAYAM KHAN, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O LAHAR, DISTT BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI RUDRA PRATAP SINGH KAURAV, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
PETITIONER),
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
PURANI CHHAWANI DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT REKHA PANTHI THROUGH POLICE STATION
PURANI CHHAWANI, GWALIOR GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI R.K. AWASTHI, LEARNED PP),
This appeal coming on for HEARING this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The appellants have filed this criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 being aggrieved by order dated 30/11/2023 passed by Special Judge (SC
ST Act), Gwalior rejecting the application for anticipatory bail filed under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
T h e appellants are apprehending their arrest relating to Crime No.
390/2023 registered at Police Station Purani Chhawani, District Gwalior (M.P.)
for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and
Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (hereinafter would be
referred as to the `Act of 1989').
As per prosecution case, Rekha Panthi W/o Jagdish submitted a written
complaint to SHO PS Purani Chhawani, Gwalior interalia, alleging that on
21.08.2023 around 1 in the afternoon, Muhid, Nishar, Bejad and Arbaj came at
her plot and started abusing her in filthy language with reference to her caste.
Accused claimed ownership over the plot. When she objected, Muhid assaulted
her with wooden stick and stones, Nishar kicked her waist and Bejad and Arbaj
assaulted her with fists. After threatening to kill her, they fled away. On such
allegations, PS Purani Chhawani registered FIR at Crime No.390 of 2023 for
offence punishable u/s. 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST ( PA) Act.
Complainant was forwarded for medico-legal examination. The injuries were
found to be simple in nature. Statements of witnesses have been recorded.
Relevant seizure has been made. Appellants were noticed U/s 41A of the
Cr.P.C. Investigation is underway.
Learned counsel for the appellants in addition to the grounds mentioned
in the appeal submits that the appellants have falsely been implicated in the
matter. Referring to sale deed dated 23.09.2015, learned counsel submits that
Muhid had purchased the disputed plot from Jardar Khan. Complainant Rekha
Panthi was trying to take illegal possession over the plot. Therefore, appellants
have been falsely implicated in this matter. Appellant Nishar is a teacher by
profession and Muhid has a private job. No criminal antecedent is reported
against the appellants. No custodial interrogation is required with regard to the
appellants. The investigation is almost complete, therefore, there is no
likelihood of interfering with the investigation or tampering with the evidence.
Appellants are permanent residents of Gwalior (M.P.), therefore, there is no
likelihood of absconding leaving behind their family and occupation. Jail
incarceration would bring social disrepute and personal hardship to the
appellants.
Learned counsel for the appellants relying on the judgments of Supreme
Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of investigation (2022) 10
SCC 51, further contends that the appellants have cooperated in investigation in
compliance with the notice issued under Section 41A of Cr.P.C, therefore,
rejection of their application by learned Sessions Judge, was unwarranted. From
allegations in the FIR, no offence punishable under S.C S.T (PA) Act is made
out against the appellants. Rest of the offences are punishable with
imprisonment of less than Seven years. Therefore, the impugned order may be
set-aside and the appellants may be released on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the anticipatory bail
application and requests for rejection of the same.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
Considering the arguments advanced by both the parties and overall
circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal. The order
dated 30/11/2023 is set-aside and it is directed that in the event of arrest of
appellants MUHAMMAD NISHAR KHAN AND MUHID KHAN, they shall
be released on bail in relation to the Crime No. 390/2023 registered at Police
Station Purani Chhawani, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence punishable
under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) 3(2)
(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act 1989, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety
each of the same amount to the satisfaction of the officer making arrest/trial
Court, for compliance with the following conditions:
(1) Appellants shall make themselves available for investigation as may
directed by the officer, in-charge of investigation;
(2) Appellants shall not commit or get involved in any offence of similar
nature;
(3) Appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
them/him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer;
(4) Appellants shall not directly or indirectly attempt to temper with the
evidence or allure, pressurize or threaten the witness;
(5) Upon submission of final report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C, the
appellants shall furnish fresh personal bond and solvent surety of aforementioned
amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, if so directed and thereafter, shall
remain present on every date of hearing as may be directed by the concerned
Court;
(6) During trial, the applicants shall ensure due compliance of provisions of
Section 309 of Cr.P.C. regarding examination of witnesses in attendance;
This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of breach
of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become ineffective without reference to
the Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Rks
