Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/8061/2023 of SANTOSH SEN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIAON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8061 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SANTOSH SEN S/O SHRI HAZARILAL SEN, AGED 50YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GRAMBAJNIPURA POLICE STATION CHACHODA, DISTRICTGUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI ANSHU GUPTA -ADVOCATE)
.....APPELLANT
AND
1.STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION AJK, GUNA DISTRICT GUNA (MADHYAPRADESH)STATION AJK, GUNA DISTRICT GUNA (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.GOVIND AHIRWAR S/O JAMUNALAL AHIRWAR,AGED 22 YEARS, R/O GRAM BAJNIPURA POLICESTATION CHACHODA, DISTRICT GUNA (MADHYAPRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI RAVI BALLABH TRIPATHI - PANEL LAWYER FOR STATE)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
It is submitted by the Counsel for the State that the complainant has been informed about the pendency of this appeal, as required under Section 15-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)Act.
2. Case Diary is available.
3. This appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the ScheduledCastes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 beingaggrieved by the order dated 09.06.2023 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities)Guna rejecting the anticipatory bail application.
4. The appellant apprehends his arrest in Crime No.08/2023 registered byPolice Station – AJK Guna, District Guna for offence punishable underSections 294, 323, 336, 34, 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va)of SC/ST Act.
5. It is submitted by counsel for appellant that this Court in the case of Atendra Singh Rawat Vs. State of M.P., 2019 (2) MPLJ (Cri) 481, hasheld that if the allegations made against the accused do not make out a caseunder the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, then the baras contained under Section 18 of the Act would not apply. In the present case,an order under Section 250 of MPLR Code was issued against the complainantparty with a specific finding that they have enroached upon the land belongingto the appellant. The incident is also alleged to have taken place on the plot. In-fact false allegations have been made in order to overcome the rigors of orderpassed under Section 250 of MPLR Code. The appellant is ready and willing tocooperate in the investigation and the trial is likely to take sufficiently long timeand there is no possibility of their absconding or tampering with prosecutioncase.
6. Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by Counsel for theState. It is submitted that in view of the bar as contained Section 18 of the Act,this appeal is not maintainable.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
8. So far as the question of maintainability of appeal for grant of anticipatory bail is concerned, this Court can always look into the allegations tofind out as to whether a prima-facie offence under the provisions of SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out or not. If the facts of present caseare considered, then it appears that an order under Section 250 of MPLR Codewas passed against complainant party and in-spite of that, they did not vacatethe disputed land. Accordingly, the possibility of false implication or overimplication or exercise of right of private defense by the appellant is not ruledout.
9. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinionthat the bar as contained under Section 18 of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)Act will not apply.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and withoutcommenting on the merits of the case, the appeal is allowed subject to conditionthat if the appellant appears before the Investigating Officer (Arresting Officer)on or before 10.01.2024, he shall be released on bail on their furnishing apersonal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with onesurety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer(Investigating Officer).
11. The appellant shall make himself available for interrogation by theInvestigating Officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the otherconditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
12. It is made clear that in case if the appellant fails to appear before theInvestigating Officer ( Arresting Authority) on or before 10.01.2024, then thisorder shall lose its effect and the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to takethem in custody.
13. In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the caseof Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18/3/2021 in CriminalAppeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of bail be sent to thecomplainant.
14. CC as per rules.
Aman
(G.S. AHLUWALIA)V. JUDGE