Dharmendra Sharma vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court allowed the bail application. While acknowledging the allegations under Section 307 IPC, the Court noted that the applicant had been in custody since December 1, 2022. Crucially, the Court referred to the Medical Legal Certificate (MLC) report, which indicated only one abrasion on the right shoulder. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court found sufficient grounds to grant bail. The applicant was ordered to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the trial court. The applicant is also required to present himself before the trial court on each and every date fixed for trial. The issue of guilt or innocence was not decided, only the applicant's entitlement to bail pending trial.

Facts

The applicant, Dharmendra Sharma, was arrested on December 1, 2022, in connection with a crime registered under Sections 307, 294, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleges that on May 22, 2022, the complainant, Abhishek Chadda, went to Priyanka Enterprises to collect a GST bill. When refused, an altercation ensued, and the complainant was allegedly assaulted by the applicant and co-accused with various weapons, including a poker. The complainant sustained injuries, including an abrasion, laceration, and contusions. Medical examination revealed a subgaleal swelling but no intracranial hemorrhage or bony injury. The applicant, seeking bail, contends he was falsely implicated and that the complainant initiated the physical altercation. He has been in custody since his arrest.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the nature of the alleged offences under Sections 307, 294, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the medical evidence on record? Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated and has been in custody since December 1, 2022. It was further submitted that the medical report indicated only a minor abrasion on the injured's shoulder and no fracture, suggesting the severity of the alleged assault under Section 307 IPC might be overstated. The applicant's counsel also suggested that the complainant and others initiated the physical altercation. Therefore, bail should be granted. Respondent's Arguments: The learned counsel for the State and the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application, praying for its dismissal.