SUDHIR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.
LAWS(MPH)-2014-12-67
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on December 18,2014

SUDHIR SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF M.P. Respondents




JUDGEMENT

A.M. Khanwilkar, J. - (1.)THESE applications for grant of regular bail have been filed on 3rd December, 2014, in Crime No. 17/2013 and Crime No. 18/2013 registered with S.T.F. Police Station, Bhopal respectively, in connection with offences commonly known as VYAPAM examination scam cases.
(2.)THESE applications were listed before the Court for the first time on 11.12.2014. On that day, the counsel for the applicant pointed out the order passed by the Supreme Court dated 01.12.2014 in S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. 8154 -8156/2014. In the context of the time frame given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Court noted that the applicant after filing of the applications should have taken steps for listing of the matters immediately, but was content with its listing on the 5th Court working day after removal of office objections, as per the date assigned by CMIS. The Court acceded to the request of the counsel for the prosecution to give time to get complete instructions. As a result, the matters were ordered to be listed on 15.12.2014. On that day when the matter was called out in the first round, it was kept back due to non -availability of the counsel. The matter, however, reached at the end of the day, when the arguments commenced. The argument of the counsel for the applicant remained inconclusive as a result of which the same was ordered to be listed on the next day to be proceeded as overnight part -heard case. The request of the applicant's counsel for taking up the matter on 18.12.2014 was turned down, in view of the limited time frame. Accordingly, the matter was notified as Item No. 1 on 16.12.2014. The arguments were heard at length and then deferred for pronouncement of order on 18.12.2014.
As aforesaid, these two bail applications are filed in respect of separate crimes in which the applicant has been named as an accused. However, we are disposing of both these applications together by this common order considering the overlapping arguments canvassed by the parties.

(3.)IN view of the liberty granted to the parties in terms of order dated 11.12.2014, the applicant has filed interim applications for taking additional documents on record, which are part of the charge -sheet already filed against the applicant in Crime No. 18/2013. These applications are allowed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.