Dalveer Singh Kansana vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

S.A.Dharmadhikari, J

I.A. No.16460/2021, an application for urgent hearing is considered and allowed.

I.A. No.16842, an application under Section 301(2) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the complainant for assisting the Public Prosecutor.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed.

Shri Shivendra Singh Kushwah, Advocate and his associates are permitted to assist the Public Prosecutor.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Case diary perused.

The applicant has filed this second application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. First application was dismissed as withdrawn vide

order dated 30.04.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.20884/2021.

The applicant has been arrested on 02.04.2021 by Police Station- Jiwaji University, District Gwalior (M.P.), in connection with Crime No.385/2017

registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 294, 506, 147 and 148 of the IPC.

Allegation against the applicant and other co-accused persons in short on 24.08.2017 at about 2 to 3 p.m., when the complainant was present at the

tower building, at that time, Ramu Singh Gurjar, Deepu, Pappu, Soneram, Mewaram, Rajendra Singh Gurjar, Bhpendra @ Bhuppu and present

applicant Dalveer Singh came there with the weapons like sticks and dandas in furtherance of their common object. All the accused persons started to

beat the complainant with an intention to kill, due to which, the complainant sustained various injuries on his body. It is further alleged that during

incident present applicant had snatched the licensee revolver of the complainant and thereafter, he fired the gun shot, but nobody sustained the gun

shot injury. On the aforesaid basis, crime has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in custody since 02.04.2021. Charge sheet

has been filed and therefore, no further custodial interrogation is required. There is a cross case registered against the complainant party. Only

omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and no specific role has been assigned. Both the parties have entered into compromise

and the application for compounding the offence was also filed but since the offence is non compoundable, therefore, the same was dismissed. No

injury has been caused to anyone in the said incident. In fact the complainant himself was armed with pistol and he fired from that pistol. The applicant

belongs to reputed family. Disposal of the matter will take long time. It is further submitted that trial is held up due to COVID-19 and the applicant

cannot be kept in custody for an unlimited period without any substantial reason. It is further submitted that in view of outbreak of COVID-19,

detention of the applicant in already congested prison may be detrimental. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Gwalior (M.P.) and there

is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be

imposed by this Court. Under these grounds, applicant prays for grant of bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record,

no case for grant of bail is made out. It is further submitted that the offence is of the year 2017, whereas the applicant was absconding and has been

recently arrested on 02.04.2021. The matter of compromise cannot be considered at the stage of grant of bail. The applicant is the main accused and

is having five criminal antecedents. The allegation on the present applicant is of beating Umesh with sariya. According to MLC, he received six

injuries and was hospitalized for a long period. Two co-accused persons are still absconding. In fact, the present applicant snatched the licensee gun of

the complainant and started firing. The complainant might have fired in self defence. So far as other co-accused persons, who have been enlarged on

bail, are concerned, they were in custody more than the present applicant, whereas the applicant has recently been arrested. On all such grounds, he

prays for rejection of bail application.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and gravity of the offence, this Court is

not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, application stands dismissed.