SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(MP) 321

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
G.S. AHLUWALIA, J.
Pintu Gurjar - Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. - Respondent
MCRC 25450 of 2021
Decided on : 01-06-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, adv
For the Respondent: Shri Nitin Goyal, adv

Point of Law- Criminal assault - Grant of temporary bail of 90 days - Unlawful assembly - Bail petition of others accused got rejected - Temporary bail granted to look after his family, the prayer for grant of bail on merit is rejected.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - S. 439 - Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307, 195-A, 323, 294, 147, 148 Bail application - Covid -19 Epidemic - Temporary Bail - Criminal assault causing injuries - Whether bail can be granted.

Held, Applicant and other co-accused persons were pressurizing the complainant to compound a previously instituted criminal case and when he refused to do so, then he was assaulted -it is true that the bail applications of co-accused Anil alias Bala Yadav and Sonu Gurjar have been dismissed but in view of second wave of Covid 19 pandemic, the prayer for temporary bail for a period of three months may be considered.

Result: Application disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

1. Case diary is available.

2. This first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of bail.

3. The applicant is in jail from 22/01/2021 in connection with Crime No.770/2020 registered at Police Station Bahodapur, Gwalior for offence under Sections 307, 195-A, 323, 294, 147, 148 of IPC.

4. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution case, the applicant and other co-accused persons were pressurizing the complainant to compound a previously instituted criminal case and when he refused to do so, then he was assaulted. It is submitted that it is true that the bail applications of co-accused Anil alias Bala Yadav and Sonu Gurjar have been dismissed but in view of second wave of Covid 19 pandemic, the prayer for temporary bail for a period of three months may be considered.

5. Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the Counsel for the State. It is submitted that six injuries were caused to Ajay Tiwari and two injuries were caused to Pavan Yadav and Ajay Tiwari had suffered multiple fractures.

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

7. 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

- 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.”

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the second wave of Covid-19 pandemic and the limited prayer made by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant may be granted temporary bail for a period of 90 days so that he can look after his family, the prayer for grant of bail on merit is rejected, however, the prayer for grant of temporary bail is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a 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 Trial Court or C.J.M. or Remand Magistrate (Whosoever is available), the applicant be released on temporary bail for a period of 3 months from the date of his release. The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking that he shall surrender immediately after the period of temporary bail is over, unless and until the period of temporary bail is extended by this Court. He shall also furnish an undertaking before the Court that he shall abide by all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./ State Gov

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top