Madhya Pradesh High Court
Brijesh Joshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 February, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 28 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2404 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
BRIJESH JOSHI S/O SHRI OM PRAKASH JOSHI, AGED
ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB
VILLAGE SATAI POLICE STATION SATAI DISTRICT
CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI BHARAT KUMAR KACHERE - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION ORCHA DISTRICT NIWARI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. KRIPAL SINGH KHANGAR S/O SHRI BABULAL
KAHNGAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, VILLAGE
NARIAYA MOHALLA ORCHA P.S. ORCHA
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI MANOJ KUSHWAHA - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/
STATE. )
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This fourth bail application in the form of criminal appeal under Section
14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed on behalf of the appellant challenging the
order dated 12.2.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, Tikamgarh (M.P.) whereby the appellant's second bail
application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C has been dismissed. His earlier three
bail applications were dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed vide order dated
4.10.2023, passed in Cr.A.No.11790/2023; order dated 15.12.2023 passed in
Cr.A. No.15283/2023 and order dated 8.2.2024 passed in Cr.A. No.640/2024.
2. Appellant has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.340/2023
dated 20.6.2023 registered at Police Station Orcha, District Niwari (M.P.) for
commission of offence under Sections 302, 34 of IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989. He is in jail since 25.6.2023.
3. As per the prosecution story, on 20.6.2023 at around 7.30 P.M.
Kripal Singh lodged Dehati Nalishi with Sub Inspector Rahul Roy, stating that
he runs Kali Dhaba in front of Mahakali ground. He is blessed with three sons
namely Shivam, Ashutosh and Aniket. He was having some dispute with
Ashish Joshi for the last sometime. On 20.6.2023 at around 4.30 P.M. he was
working at his Dhaba. In the meantime, he heard voice of "Bachao Bachao"
of his son Aniket from Mahakali ground. He along with his brother Chandan
reached on the ground and saw that Ashish Joshi, Akash Joshi, Dheeraj Joshi,
and Brijesh Joshi all assaulting his son. Ashish Joshi was having knife in his
right hand while Akash and Brijesh were catching hold the hands and Dhiraj
Joshi had caught the feet of his son. They all were yelling that today they have
to finish him. It is alleged that Ashish Joshi by means of knife started to inflict
injuries on his son despite his fall on ground, he continued to inflict knife
blows on him. Seeing them, they all abused them too but fled away. In the
meantime, Manoj Joshi, Gokul Kushwaha and others also reached there. They
all took his son Aniket to Orcha Hospital. Thereafter when he was being taken
to Jhansi from Orcha hospital on the way in ambulence he succumbed to his
injuries. Dehaiti Nalishi was recorded and on the basis of Daihati Nalishi, FIR
was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant has not
committed any offence. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated.
Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on the judgment dated
01.08.2023 delivered in SLP (Cri) No.9777/2022 (Nirmala Devi Vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh) has submitted that in the case, co-accused was acquitted in
the same nature of offence. It is also the contention of learned counsel that
similarly situated co-accused Dhiraj has already been enlarged on bail by co-
ordinate Bench. It is submitted that allegation against co-accused was that of
catching hold of feet of deceased whereas, the allegation against the present
appellant is that of catching hold the hand. As allegations are similar, therefore,
present appellant being similarly situated, may be also released on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed grant of
bail and has submitted that in this case more than 10 witnesses have already
been examined before the trial Court. Trial is at the verge of conclusion. It is
further submitted that eye witnesses Kripal, Vikas and Chandrabhan have
supported prosecution story. In postmortem report, 15 stab wounds have been
found on the dead body of deceased. The present applicant and other co-
accused persons in furtherance of their common intention have brutally
murdered the deceased.
6. Considering the allegations against the present applicant, his
involvement and the active participation in commission of offence in furtherance
of common intention and postmortem report in which 15 incised wounds have
been found on the dead body and gravity of offence, but without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is not a fit case for
grant of bail.
7. As far as grant of bail to similarly situated co-accused is
concerned, that has been granted by Coordinate Bench of this Court. As the
present appellant had caught hold the hand of deceased when he was being
continuously stabbed by the main accused, I am of the view that there is no
similarity with the case of co-accused persons.
8. Therefore, this fourth bail application in the form of criminal appeal
under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, filed on behalf of appellant - Brijesh
Joshi is dismissed.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
mrs. mishra
