IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT th ON THE 5 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 30332 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S. HATA DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH).

.....APPLICANT (SHRI G.S. THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

AND

1. ANUVANSH WARDHAN SINGH @ SAKSHAM HAJARI S/O ALOK WARDHAN SINGH HAJARI, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O HAJARI WARD HATA P.S. HATA DISTT. DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH).

2. ANURAG WARDHAN SINGH HAJARI S/O SHRI PUSHPENDRA SINGH HAJARI R/O HAJARI WARD DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH).

3. VIJAY KORI S/O HARISHANKAR KORI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O MURLI MANOHAR WARD HATA DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH).

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI ANIL KHARE - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS. TANVI KHARE - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1, SHRI S. PANDEY - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 AND SHRI AMIT KHATRI - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3).

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

State of Madhya Pradesh has filed this application under Section 439(2)

of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.1 Anuvansh Wardhan Singh @ Saksham Hazari in Criminal Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR Appeal No. 6243/2022, vide order dated 18.08.2022.

2. Respondent No.2 namely Anurag Wardhan Singh Hajari has lodged an FIR at Crime No. 170/2022 at Police Station Hata, District Damoh (M.P.) under Sections 349, 307 and 294 of Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. As per prosecution version on 10.04.2022 at about 1:35 PM, respondent No.1 entered into the house of respondent No.2 with revolver and opened fire, which hit respondent No.3-Vijay Kori on his waist and he fell down and thereafter, firing was made on respondent No.2 i.e. Anurag Wardhan Singh. He ran to terrace to save his life and shouted for help. Hearing cries, mother of respondent No.2 came on spot. Seeing this, respondent No.1 fled away from spot firing in air.

3. In aforesaid crime number, respondent No.1 filed appeal for grant of bail. Court considered his appeal and found that Vijay Kori-respondent No.3 in his dying declaration has stated to police that masked person had opened fire on him. Later on, he improved his version and stated that mask of respondent No.1 slipped and he has seen him firing on him. It was also argued that there was enmity between respondent No.1 and respondent No.2, therefore, respondent No.1 has falsely been implicated by respondent No.2 in said crime. Considering enmity and inconsistency in prosecution story, appeal was allowed and respondent No.1 was released on bail.

4. After grant of bail, respondents No. 2 and 3 filed Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.11203/2022, SLP (Crl.) No. 2789/2023 and SLP (Crl.) No. 2870/2023 before Apex Court for cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.1.

5. Against order of grant of bail in Criminal Appeal No. 6243/2022 dated Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR

18.08.2023, respondent No.2 and 3 had filed Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No. 11203/2022. Against order dated 25.01.2023, respondent No.2 and 3 had filed SLP (Crl.) No. 2789/2023 and against order dated 25.12.2023 passed by High Court rejecting application for cancellation of bail dated 18.08.2022, SLP (Crl.) No. 2870/2023 was preferred by respondent No.2 and 3 before Supreme Court. On said SLP (Crl), Supreme Court directed the State to apply for cancellation of bail before High Court. Supreme Court has not interfered in orders assailed in the petitions. It was directed that once State applies for cancellation of bail before High Court, then same may be considered on its own merits having regard to the facts and incidents which may have occurred subsequent to passing of initial bail order dated 18.08.2022 and also having regard to provisions of Section 15(A) of Scheduled Caste and