Manish Gothi vs State Of MP

Anil Verma, J

This is second application for bail u/S. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by applicant Manish who is in custody since 17/4/2021 in

connection with Crime No. 11/2021, registered at P.S. Crime Branch, Distt. Indore (MP) for commission of offence punishable u/Ss. 420, 188, 34 of

the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sec. 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act and Sec. 3 of Epidemic Disease Act. First application was dismissed on merits

vide order dated 23/7/2021 passed in M.CR.C.No. 22573/2021.

As per prosecution story, on 17/04/2021, on the basis of secret information received from the informer, that two persons are trying to sell Remdesivir

injection at Bangali Wine Shop, the police party reached at the spot and caught the applicant Manish. During interrogation, Remdesivir injection has

been seized from the possession of the applicant. He was found selling the Remdesivir injection at the rate of Rs. 22,000/- per injection. P.S Crime

Branch arrested the present applicant and the crime has been registered under the above sections. It is also alleged that the accused had no valid

licence for such sale of the alleged injections and he was indulged in the black-marketing of the Remdesivir injection, which was highly required for

treatment of COVID-19 patients.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been implicated falsely in the above mentioned case. Investigation is

over and charge sheet has been filed. Applicant is in custody since 17/4/2021. Unfortunately, the respondent utterly failed to apprise the Court with the

correct facts and provisions of law applicable to the applicant. Looking to the allegations levelled against the applicant, Sec. 3(3) or 3(C) of the

Epidemic Disease Act, 1897 is not attracted. The applicant challenged his illegal detention under the National Security Act, 1980 by filing W.P.No.

13969/2021 which was allowed by the Hon’ble Court on 5/8/2021 and the illegal detention of the petitioner was quashed. The applicant has

purchased and procured the alleged Remdesevir injection for the treatment of his relative upon the prescription of the treating Doctor. Said relative of

the applicant then passed away due to Covid-19 because the injection was wrongfully seized by the police and could never be utilized for the treatment

of applicant’s relative. Hence, he prayed that this application may be allowed and the applicant be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned PL for the respondent â€" State opposes the prayer for grant of bail by stating that after passing the earlier order, there is

no material change in the circumstances. The case of the National Security Act was entirely different from the present offence. He prays for

rejection of this repeat bail application.

Although the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No. 13969/2021 vide order dated 5/8/2021 set aside the impugned order dated 20/5/2021 passed by

the District Magistrate, Indore whereby he has detained the applicant by exercising the power under sub-Section (2) read with sub-Section (3) of Sec.

3 of the National Security Act, 1980, but subject matter of the Writ Petition was different from the present criminal case.

In this repeat bail application, the applicant has taken a new plea that he had purchased and procured the alleged Remdesevir Injection for the

treatment of his relative upon the prescription of treating Doctor and said relative of the applicant then passed away due to Covid-19. The applicant

has filed copy of the prescription and death certificate of Murlidhar in support of his contention. But it is noteworthy that applicant did not take this

defence in his earlier bail application u/S. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before this Court. Even he has not pleaded such defence in the

bail application filed before the Court below. Therefore, at this later stage, prima facie, such type of new defence does not appears to be genuine.

After considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that earlier bail application of the

applicant has already been dismissed on merits, while considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and thereafter there is no change in the

circumstances in which the present bail application can be considered.

Accordingly, this repeat bail application is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy, as per Rules.