Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 484 (MP)

Umesh Chandra Kaurav v. State Of Madhya Pradesh

2020-04-28

S.A.DHARMADHIKARI

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. The applicant has filed this first application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. 2. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Bilauva, Dabra, Gwalior, in connection with Crime No.25/2016 registered in relation to the offence punishable under section 409 of the IPC. 3. Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that while working as Tahsildar, he wrongly released a vehicle seized in respect of offence pertaining to illegal mining. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 21/3/2020. Earlier, anticipatory bail was extended to him by this Court vide order dated 20/6/2016 passed in M.Cr.C. No.6695/2016. However, applicant, owing to his job-profile which required him to remain at distant places, could not effectively comply with condition no.(7) stipulated therein of marking his attendance before the concerned Police Station once in every week, leading to cancellation of anticipatory bail vide order dated 24/9/2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No.29675/2019. It is submitted that the applicant could not mark his presence as he was transferred to another place during that period and had to perform election duty, duty in Kumbh Mela and bring EVM machine from Bangalore. It is further submitted that investigation is almost complete, but charge-sheet could not be filed for want of sanction from the Government. In fact, it has been found in an enquiry that the vehicle in question was never seized. Applicant is a permanent resident of Alampur District Bhind and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. 6. However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. 8. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant namely Umesh Chandra Kaurav be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. The applicant shall also furnish a written undertaking that he will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus. 9. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-- 1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him; 2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be; 3. The applicant will not indulge 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; 4. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 5. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. 6. If the applicant commits any offence while on bail, this order shall automatically stand cancelled without reference to the Court. 10. Learned Public Prosecutor is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action. 11. E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible by the office of this Court. 12. Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.