'An Undertrial Can't Be Kept In Jail For An Unlimited Period At The Mercy Of The Prosecution', MP HC Raps Vidisha SP For Trying To Undermine The Authority Of The Court [Read Order]

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday (01st October) observed that an under trial cannot be kept in jail for an unlimited period at the mercy of the prosecution.The Bench of Justice G. S. Ahluwalia also rapped the Superintendent of Police, Vidisha for trying to challenge the correctness of the order sheets of the Trial Court as well as trying to challenge the countrywide lockdown imposed by the Central Govt. and also trying to undermine the authority of the Court.Mater before the CourtThe Court was hearing the Seventh application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.The applicant was arrested on 22-12-2016 in connection with Crime No. 254/2016, registered by Police Station Lateri, Distt. Vidisha for the offence under Sections 327/34, 506-B,294,323,302/34 of I.P.C.The allegations against the applicant are that he along with co-accused demanded money from the deceased Mukesh for purchasing liquor and when he refused to give money, then he was assaulted on his head by means of a lathi, as a result of which he died.BackgroundEarlier, the applicant had filed an application for grant of bail on the ground of delay, which was registered as M.Cr.C. No. 37605 of 2019.The Court found that the Police Department was grossly negligent in executing the Summons/Bailable Warrants/Warrants issued against the witnesses, including the Doctors and Police witnesses, therefore, the Superintendent of Police, Vidisha was directed to appear before the Court and to explain such gross negligence on the part of his subordinates.Shri Vinayak Verma, S.P., Vidisha had appeared before this Court on 16-9-2019 and assured the Court, that in future, there shall not be any negligence on the part of his sub-ordinates.However, as per the Applicant in the present case, the things did not improve, and once again, the summons/bailable warrants/warrants issued against the Doctors and Police personals returned back either served or unserved.The applicant also filed a copy of the order sheets of the Trial Court, therefore, the Superintendent of Police; Vidisha was directed to appear before the Court through Video Conferencing.It was submitted by Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, that in fact there is no negligence on the part of the Police witnesses and in order to substantiate his contentions, Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, went to the extent of challenging the correctness of the orders passed by the Trial Court.Basis for challenging the order sheet of the Trial CourtShri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, had given an assurance in M.Cr.C. No. 37605 of 2019 on 16-9-2019. Thereafter, the Trial was listed on 19-9-2019, but still the warrants issued against the witnesses returned back either served or unserved.On 4-12-2019, Doctor Rajendra and police witnesses were not present and therefore, fresh arrest warrants were issued, and the case was fixed for 15-1-2020.Challenging the correctness of the order sheet dated 4-12-2019, it was submitted by Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, that in fact Dr. Rajendra and Sub-Inspector were present before the Court, however, due to reference on the sad demise of one Advocate, the Court work was suspended.When Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, was directed to point out from the order sheet as to whether the presence of the above mentioned two witnesses was mentioned or not, then after going through the order sheet he fairly conceded that the presence of these two witnesses is not mentioned.Further, he also accepted that these two witnesses have also not signed on the margin of the order sheet.Thus, the Court noted, that it was clear that Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, without any basis, tried to plead that the Trial Court had recorded an incorrect order sheet."Didn't Monitor the Case"Further, it was submitted by Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, that although the police department is responsible for the delay up to the month of March 2020 but since, the Trial Court was closed on 3-4- 2020, otherwise, his remaining two police witnesses would have appeared.The Court noted that the manner in which the submission was made by Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, it was clear that he was trying to put blame on the Court, that since, the Courts were closed on 3-4-2020; therefore, prosecution witnesses could not be examined.Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha, could not point any reason for his confidence, because he has fairly conceded that after giving an assurance before this Court on 16-9-2019, he did not monitor this case.Court's Analysis and DecisionThe Court remarked,"One thing is clear that after giving assurance before this Court on 16-9-2019, neither Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha took pains to monitor the present case, nor his Gazetted Officer acted in compliance of circular dated 30-3-2019 issued by the Police Headquarter. In spite of his gross negligent and irresponsible conduct after 16-9-2019, Shri Verma, S.P., Vidisha tried to challenge the correctness of the order sheets of the Trial Court as well as tried to challenge the Countrywide lockdown imposed by the...

'An Undertrial Can't Be Kept In Jail For An Unlimited Period At The Mercy Of The Prosecution', MP HC Raps Vidisha SP For Trying To Undermine The Authority Of The Court [Read Order]

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags