Savita vs State Of M.P

In the wake of unprecedented and uncertain situation due to outbreak of the Novel Corona virus (COVID-19) and considering the advisories issued by

the Government of India, this application has been heard and decided through video conferencing to maintain social distancing. The parties are being

represented by the respective counsel through video conferencing, following the norms of social distancing/ physical distancing in letter and spirit.

Heard on I.A.No.9338/2020, an application under Section 301 (2) of Cr.P.C.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, I.A.No.9338/2020 is allowed and Shri D.S. Rajawat , counsel for the complainant and his associates are

permitted to assist the learned Panel Lawyer in the matter.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The applicant has filed this first application u/S.438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail as she has an apprehension of her arrest in connection with

Crime No.151/2019 registered at Police Station Bhonti, District Shivpuri for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 336, 342, 392 of IPC,

section 25 and 27 of Arms Act and sections 11/13 of M.P.D.V.P.K.Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that she is falsely implicated in the case and she has not committed any offence in any manner. He has

drawn attention of this Court to the order passed in M.Cr.C.No.17944/2020 vide order dated 3.7.2020, by which this Court has allowed the bail to the

husband of the present applicant. It is submitted that the incident is said to have taken place on 13.7.2019 of which the report was tried to be lodged by

the complainant of the present case and he has tried to outrage the modesty of the present applicant, for which the complaint was made to the police

authorities, but when no action was taken the matter was immediately reported to the S.H.O. vide letter dated 14.7.2019 thereafter to the S.D.O.P

vide letter dated 15.7.2019 and thereafter to the Superintendent of Police vide letter dated 29.7.2019, but despite of the same when no action was

taken a Private Complaint was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class for offences under sections 354, 456, 506-B of IPC, wherein the

statement of the present applicant has been recorded. She has categorically deposed against the present applicant that he entered the house and tried

to outrage the modesty of the present applicant. It is submitted that the incident is said to have taken place on 13.7.2019 and thereafter the report has

been lodged after considerable delay of 10 to 12 days and the reason for delay in recording the FIR is that the complainant has sustained injuries,

therefore, he could not lodge the report at the relevant time. However, from the statement, it is clear that the complainant was brought to the police

station on 13.7.2019 and he has not got the FIR lodged at the relevant time. It is argued that the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in

nature as being pointed out in the medical report by the Doctor also. He submits that the applicant was not absconding as she was regularly attending

the Trial Court and she has also got filed the private complaint and got recorded her statement before the learned JMFC. She is ready to abide by all

the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this court while considering the application for grant of bail. He has further relied upon the judgments

passed in the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 163,2 Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and

another in SLP (Criminal) Nos.7281-7282/2017 passed on 29-01-2020, Bharat Chaudhary and another Vs. State of Bihar and another, (2003) 8 SCC

77 and Ravindra Saxena Vs. State of Rajasthan, (2010) 1 SCC 684 and has argued that application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. is maintainable under

the M.P.D.V.P.K. Act also when no offence is made out. In the present case from the entire prosecution story itself no offence is made out against

the present applicant. She has further shown her willingness to contribute an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the PM Care Fund. Under these

circumstances, counsel for the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the application for grant of anticipatory bail

stating that there is specific bar under the M.P.D.V.P.K. Act for consideration of anticipatory bail. It is argued that the delay in lodging the FIR has

properly been explained by the complainant. Counsel for the complainant has drawn attention of this Court to the medical documents and has argued

that the complainant was under regular treatment and was referred to the District Hospital and thereafter to the J.A.H. Hospital Gwalior, but he could

not clarify the position that when the simple injuries are sustained by the complainant then what was the reason for his continuous treatment in the

hospital. A specific query was put forth to explain the delay in lodging the FIR especially in the circumstance when the applicant of the present case

has lodged a report to the police authorities on 14.7.2019 i.e. immediately on the next date of commission of the offence. The only answer which could

be given by the counsel for the complainant that the complainant has sustained injuries, therefore, there was delay in lodging the FIR, but from the

medical report it is seen that the injuries are simple in nature.

The Hon'ble Supreme by order dated 23.03.2020 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 Level 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 under trial 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 overall facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that immediate steps were taken by the present applicant by filing an

application before the concerning S.H.O. thereafter to the S.D.O.P and subsequently to the Superintendent of Police and when no action was taken

she has even lodged the private complaint before the learned JMFC and there is a considerable delay in lodging the FIR which makes the prosecution

story doubtful, this Court deems it appropriate to treat this application for grant of anticipatory bail even in case of M.P.D.V.P.K. Act as prima facie

from the prosecution itself it appears to be a suspicious case and further taking into consideration of the present scenario of COVID-19, the

application for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand only) with one solvent surety of like amount to the satisfaction of Investigation Officer/trial court, as the case may be with submission of

written undertaking that she will abide by the terms and conditions of different circulars, orders as well as guidelines issued by Central Government,

State Government as well as Local Administration for maintaining social distancing, hygiene etc to avoid Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19) pandemic

and she will have to install Arogya Setu App, if not already installed.

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

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her;

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

The applicant will not indulge herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade 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 she is accused;

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

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

The applicants shall deposit Rs.10,000/- in PM CARES Fund having Account Number : 2121PM20202, IFSC Code: SBIN0000691,

SWIFT Code : SBININBB104, Name of Bank & Branch : State Bank of India, New Delhi Main Branch within seven days from today.

The applicant shall mark her attendance before the concerned police station in every fortnight till conclusion of investigation (pending if any), and if

charge sheet is being filed, she will mark her presence as per the directions issued by the concerning trial Court.

Applicant shall install Arogya Setu App in her mobile immediately and would intimate her place of residence to the SHO of concerned Police Station;

where she reside. Applicant further submit the undertaking to the effect that she will abide by the terms and conditions of different circulars, orders as

well as guidelines issued by Central Government, State Government as well as Local Administration for maintaining social distancing, hygiene etc to

avoid Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19) pandemic.

E- copy of this order be provided to the applicant and E-copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance. It is made clear that E-

copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for practical purposes in respect of this order.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.