Ramesh Savita vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This is the first application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C filed by the applicant, who apprehend his arrest in connection with Crime No.522/2019, registered at Police Station-Bahodapur, District Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has apprehension of his arrest on the basis of offence registered as above. The land in question is of joint property of present applicant as well as Ramposhaki ad-measuring 0.679 hectare out of which the dispute is in respect of 1320 sq.ft. which is according to the complainant is the plot purchased by complainant from Mr.Ramposhaki.

It is further submitted that on the basis of affidavits dated 05.09.20109 and 17.09.2019 of Ramesh Savita and Punam Savita respectively in which it is specifically mentioned that they would not make any claim in respect of said plot ad-measuring 1320 sq.ft. which is the ownership of Ms. Sudha Gupta and they would not claim any right, title, interest or possession in respect of disputed plot. Therefore, those affidavits have been filed. Counsel for the applicant further submits that his intention is never to grab the land of complainant, still false case has been registered. Even otherwise, he is ready to settle the matter, if any dispute is being raised by the complainant. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial and would make himself available as and when required. He would not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant. He also would not move in the vicinity of complainant party in any manner. He further undertakes to do some community service. Therefore, under these undertakings, the applicant may be given the benefit of anticipatory bail.

At this juncture, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submits that parties are at liberty to move appropriate application in this regard before competent authority.

Learned counsel for the complainant fairly submits that if the applicant does not disturb the title or possession of complainant Ms. Sudha Gupta so far as land purchased by the complainant ad-measuring 1320 sq.ft. is concerned, then he has no objection if the bail is granted. He further submits that it would be in the interest of parties if the demarcation, by the revenue authorities, is made.

At this juncture, learned Panel Lawyer for the State fairly submits that if appropriate proceedings for demarcation of boundaries is undertaken by the parties, then same shall be taken care of by the appropriate revenue authorities.

Both the litigating parties fairly informed this Court that dispute regarding land is between them only and no government land or land of any other person (except present three parties) is involved.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and case diary perused. Considering the submissions and facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the undertakings given by the applicant conclude the controversy, but without expressing opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.

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

The applicant shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

The applicant shall not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused; and he would not move in the vicinity/area of the complainant party.

The applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and

As per the undertaking given by counsel on behalf of the applicant, it is hereby directed that applicant shall plant 10 saplings (either fruit bearing trees or Neem/ Peepal) alongwith tree guards or has to make arrangement for fencing for protection of the trees because it is the duty of the applicant not only to plant the saplings but also to nurture them. "वृक्षारोपण के साथ, वृक्षापोशण भी आवश्यक है।" He shall plant saplings/ trees preferably of 6-8 ft., so that they would grow into full fledged trees at an early time. For ensuring the compliance, he shall have to submit all the photographs of plantation of trees/saplings before the concerned trial Court alongwith a report within 30 days from the date of release of the applicant. The progress reports shall be submitted by the applicant before the trial Court on expiry of every three months for two years.

It is the duty of the trial Court to monitor the progress of the trees because human existence is at stake because of the environmental degradation and Court cannot put a blind fold over any casualness shown by the applicant regarding compliance. Therefore, trial Court is directed to submit a report regarding progress of the trees and the compliance made by the applicant by placing a short report before this Court every quarterly (every three months), which shall be placed under the caption "Direction" before this Court.

Any default on behalf of applicant in plantation or caring of trees shall disentitle the applicant from enjoying the benefit of bail.

The applicant shall be at liberty to plant these saplings/ trees at an place of his choice if he intends to protect the trees on her owncost by providing tree guards or fencing or he may plant the saplings at Sirol Hill near New Collectorate, Gwalior for which applicant shall have to bear necessary expenses for plantation of the trees and their measures for safeguard.

This direction is made by this Court as a test case to address the Anatomy of Violence and Evil by process of Creation and a step towards Alignment with Nature. The natural instinct of compassion, service, love and mercy needs to be rekindled for human existence as they are innately engrained attributes of human existence.

"It is not the question of Plantation of a Tree but the Germination of a Thought."

A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.