Raghav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J

This is first bail application filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The petitioner is in custody since 28.09.2020 in connection with Crime No.836/2020 registered at P.S.-Motinagar, Distt.-Sagar (M.P.) for the offence

punishable under Section 457, 380 of the IPC later on added offence punishable under Section 458 of IPC.

As per prosecution case, on 10.09.2020, in the morning at about 5 A.M. present petitioner-accused and co-accused entered in the house of one

Brijendra Rai. Complainant Kamal Rani Vishwakarma and Meera Vishwakarma cried then one co-accused Uddeshya Tamrakar came out from the

house and inflicted injury to them by radium cutter and ran away from the spot. Thereafter, other two co-accused, who were present in the home also

ran away from the spot. FIR was registered. Co-accused Uddeshya Tamrakar was arrested on 11.09.2020. He disclosed the name of present

petitioner-accused. Then, present petitioner-accused is arrested in this case.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only on the ground of previous

criminal record. He is innocent person. Petitioner is made an accused in this case on the memorandum of co-accused. No theft and looted property

was seized from his possession. Petitioner-accused is in jail since 28.09.2020. Charge-sheet has been filed. It is the time of COVID-19, so further

proceedings in the trial Court is withheld. The conclusion of trial will take time. There is no chance of petitioner's absconding and tampering with the

prosecution evidence. He is also not furnish bail as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel

for the petitioner prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

 Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent-State opposes the bail application by submitting that petitioner-accused has previous criminal

record, so he is not entitled for bail.

Considering the arguments of the parties, looking to the circumstances of the case and the facts that petitioner has been made an accused in this case

only on the memorandum of the co-accused, petitioner-accused is not identified on the spot by any witness, no looted or theft property was seized

from his possession, petitioner-accused is in jail since 28.09.2020, charge-sheet has been filed, it is the time of COVID-19, so further proceedings in

the trial is withheld, the trial will take time to conclude, and there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of the prosecution,

I am of the considered view that it would be appropriate to release the petitioner on bail.

 Therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, application of the present petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable.

Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

 It is directed that petitioner-Raghav be released on bail on he furnishing a personal bail bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand

Only) with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on the dates

given by the concerned Court. It is directed that the petitioner shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

 This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:

 1. The petitioner will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

 2. The petitioner will cooperate in the trial;

3 . The petitioner applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as

to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officers;

The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

The petitioner will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

The petitioner applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the petitioner shall also comply with the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction

to the jail authority:-

The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the petitioner by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The petitioner shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

If it is found that the petitioner is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in

appropriate quarantine facility.

Certified copy as per rules.