Mithun Alias Sonu Sharma vs State Of MP And Anr

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 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

This First Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed for grant of

anticipatory bail. The appellant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.821/2020 registered at Police Station Bahodapur, District Gwalior

for offence under Sections 436, 294 of IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that on 29/08/2020, the appellant had lodged a FIR against the complainant for offence under Sections

323, 324, 294/34 of IPC and Crime No.554/2020 was registered by Police Station Bahodapur, District Gwalior. It is submitted that by way of counter-

blast, the present FIR has been lodged. Even otherwise, in the FIR it is mentioned that the complainant was sleeping and he realized that his handcart

kept out of his house was burning and when he came out, then he found that the appellant was escaping from the place of incident on his car. Thus, he

has expressed that the handcart must have been burnt by the present appellant. It is submitted that in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme

Court in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. The State of Uttarakhand & Another, Criminal Appeal No.707 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.3585

of 2002) decided on 5/11/2020, it is clear that until and unless the offence is committed with an intention that the complainant belongs to reserved

class, no offence is made out. It is further submitted that even other wise from the FIR, it is clear that nobody has seen the appellant burning the

handcart of the complainant. The appellant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time.

Per contra, the appeal is opposed by the counsel for the State. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that since the appellant himself had lodged a

FIR against the complainant, therefore, it is clear that he was previously knowing the fact that the complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste. However,

it is fairly conceded that from the FIR, it is clear that the complainant had merely seen the appellant escaping from the place of incident on his car and

he has merely expressed his suspicion on the appellant.

Considered the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

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 and without commenting on the merits of the case, this criminal appeal for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. It is

directed that if the appellant appears before the Investigating Officer on or before 15th December, 2020 and furnishes his personal bond in the sum of

Rs. 1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigation officer, then he shall be released on bail. 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 appellant is directed to strictly follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local

Administration for combating Covid 19. If it is found that the appellant 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. The appellant 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 438 of Cr.P.C. shall remain the same.

In case of violation of any of the condition(s) mentioned above, this order shall automatically lose its effect.

With aforesaid observations, this Criminal Appeal is Allowed.