High CourtsSingle Bench

Krish Rajak vs State Of M.P. And Anr

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 27 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0176

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.S. Ahluwalia, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21 · Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(gha), 3(2)(va), 14A(2), 15A · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 323, 325, 506 · Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016 — Section 92 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437, 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 4853 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

60 paragraphs · 1,180 words

G.S. Ahluwalia, J

It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the complainant has been informed about the pendency of this appeal as required under Section 15-A

of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short “Actâ€​).

Case diary is available.

This first criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Act has been filed for grant of bail.

The appellant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.38/2021 registered by Police Station Vijaypur, Distt. Guna for offence punishable under

Sections 294, 323, 325, 506, 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (gha), 3 (2) (v-a) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989. Further added Section 92 of Rights of Persons With Disabilities Act, 2016.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that appellant is in jail for the last more than four months. According to the prosecution case, the

applicant had given lathi blow on the chest of the complainant. Although redness was found on the chest of the injured, no fracture was found which

clearly shows that the assault was not given with any force. Trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or

tampering with the prosecution case.

Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State as well as complainant. However, after going through the MLC of the

injured, it is fairly conceded that the injured did not suffer any fracture of ribs and only redness was found on the chest. However, it is submitted by

Ms. Ayushi Yadav that the family members of the appellant are still threatening the complainant. Brother of the appellant had given axe blows to the

father of the complainant, however, it is fairly conceded that no FIR was lodged on the complaint made by the father of the complainant.

Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties.

The Supreme Court by order dated 23-3-2020 passed in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU

W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 has directed all the States to constitute a High Powered Committee to consider the release of prisoners in order to decongest the

prisons. The Supreme Court has observed as under :

“The issue of overcrowding of prisons is a matter of serious concern particularly in the present context of the pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID

â€" 19).

Having regard to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it has become imperative to ensure that the spread of the Corona Virus

within the prisons is controlled.

We direct that each State/Union Territory shall constitute a High Powered Committee comprising of (i) Chairman of the State Legal Services

Committee, (ii) the Principal Secretary (Home/Prison) by whatever designation is known as, (ii) Director General of Prison(s), to determine which

class of prisoners can be released on parole or an interim bail for such period as may be thought appropriate. For instance, the State/Union Territory

could consider the release of prisoners who have been convicted or are undertrial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or

less, with or without fine and the prisoner has been convicted for a lesser number of years than the maximum.

It is made clear that we leave it open for the High Powered Committee to determine the category of prisoners who should be released as aforesaid,

depending upon the nature of offence, the number of years to which he or she has been sentenced or the severity of the offence with which he/she is

charged with and is facing trial or any other relevant factor, which the Committee may consider appropriate.â€​

Considering the allegations, as well as considering the fact that in view of second wave of Covid-19 pandemic, it is also necessary to decongest jail,

and without commenting on the merits of the case, It is directed that the appellant be released on bail, on furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or CJM or Remand Magistrate (Whosoever is

available).

The appellant shall also furnish an undertaking that he will abide by all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local

Administration (General or Specific) from time to time for combating Covid-19.

The Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS by order dated 7-4-2020 has directed as under :

In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to direct that Union of India shall ensure that all the prisoners having been released by the

States/Union Territories are not left stranded and they are provided transportation to reach their homes or given the option to stay in temporary shelter

homes for the period of lockdown.

For this purpose, the Union of India may issue appropriate directions under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 or any other law for the time being in

force. We further direct that the States/Union Territories shall ensure through Directors General of Police to provide safe transit to the prisoners who

have been released so that they may reach their homes. They shall also be given an option for staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of

lockdown.

Accordingly, it is directed that before releasing the applicant, the jail authorities shall get the applicant examined by a competent Doctor and if the

Doctor is of the opinion that his Corona Virus test is necessary, then the same shall be conducted. If the applicant is not found suspected of Covid19

infection or if his test report is negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his

house as per the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS (Supra), and if

he is found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. The applicant is further

directed to strictly follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration for combating Covid19. If

it is found that the applicant has violated any of the instructions (whether general or specific) issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local

Administration, then this order shall automatically lose its effect, and the Local Administration/Police Authorities shall immediately take him in custody

and would send him to the same jail from where he was released. The applicant is further directed to supply a copy of this bail order to the police

station having jurisdiction over his place of residence.

The other conditions of Section 437, 439 Cr.P.C. shall remain the same.

This order shall remain in force, till the conclusion of Trial. In case of bail jump, or violation of any of the condition(s) mentioned above, this order shall

automatically lose its effect.

With aforesaid observations, this application is Allowed.