Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
COMMON ORDER BELOW BAIL APPLICATIONS
(B. A. No.799/2022 – Accused No.1, Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha
B.A. No.905/2022 – Accused No.2, Kumari Shweta Singh
B.A. No.989/2022 – Accused No.3, Mayank Pradeep Singh Rawat
B.A. No.1060/2022 – Accused No.4, Neeraj Dashrath Bishnoi
B.A. No.994/2022 – Accused No.5, Omkareshwar Thakur
B.A. filed by Accused No.6, Neerajkumar Nunwa Singh)
1. All these applications filed under Section 437 of Code of Criminal
Procedure for regular bail. Heard Ld. Advocates for all the
applicants/accused persons. Heard Ld. Special Public Prosecutor.
2. Perused record. Perused say filed by Ld. Special Public Prosecutor
and Investigating Officer.
3. The bail application bearing No.799/2022, is filed by Accused
No.1, Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha, stating that he is falsely implicated in this
matter. He belongs to respectable family and have no criminal
antecedents. He will not tamper prosecution evidence and he himself
surrendered before investigating agency. He is ready to remain abide by
the conditions. Investigation relating to him is over and during course of
investigation no role seems to be attributed to him and no connection of
him is found with the Bullibai Application. No offence made out. He is
just 21 years boy and pursuing higher education. Offences are not much
serious. He is already in jail for substantial period. Therefore, he shall
released on bail.
4. The bail application No.905/2022 is filed by Accused No.2, Kumari
Shweta Singh. It is very lengthy application citing history and various
aspects of bail jurisprudence. From this lengthy application, the summary
of grounds culled out are, that she is innocent and not connected with any
act. No role attributed to her either for creation of application or
uploading the photos. Her arrest is illegal. She is a girl of tender age and
1/8
-- 1 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
belonged to Dalit family. She is orphan and in financial problems. None
of the offence alleged made out. She is ready to remain abide by the
conditions.
5. Bail application No.989/2022 is filed by Accused No.3, Mayank
Pratapsingh Rawat. He pleads for bail mainly on the ground that he is
innocent person and falsely implicated in the matter. He is in custody
since long. Investigation relating to him is over. Nothing transpired
against him during investigation. There is no evidence connecting him
with alleged offences found during investigation. All the evidence already
collected. Offences are not much serious. He is of tender age and pursuing
his graduation from Delhi University. He is permanent resident of
Uttarakhand and ready to remain abide by the conditions, if any, imposed.
Therefore, he shall be released on bail.
6. Bail application No.1060/2022, is filed by Accused No.4, Neeraj
Dashrath Bishnoi, through his sister. The Ld. Special Prosecutor brought
to notice that application is not signed by accused himself or duly
appointed advocate. He disputed the tenability of application for want of
signature of applicant/accused himself or his proper representation. Ld.
Advocate for the said accused then filed pursis and withdrew the
application. He also sought permission to apply afresh after due
compliance. Permission needs to be granted to him to withdraw the
application. Therefore, there is no need of discussion on merits of the said
application.
7. Bail application No.994/2022, is filed by Accused No.5,
Omkareshwar Thakur. He sought bail mainly on the ground that he is
falsely implicated in this case. He hails from respectable family. He is
already released on bail by Delhi Court in the same case registered at
Delhi. Investigation relating to him is over. No offence punishable under
2/8
-- 2 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
Section 153-A and 153-B of Indian Penal Code is made out in view of
law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of Manzar Sayeed Khan and
ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra ((2007)(4)SCCR907). As per charge sheet itself he
is not creator of the Application and even if it is presumed that whatever
transpired during investigation is true, it constitutes no offence. Further,
there is no need of his detention as investigation is over. He is 26 years
old boy, matter is affecting his reputation in society. He is in need of
counseling and not incarceration. Allegations are not severely punishable.
Accused has no criminal antecedents and ready to remain abide by the
conditions, if any, imposed. Therefore, he shall be released on bail.
8. Accused No.6, in his bail application contended somewhat same
reasons and sought bail stating that he has no criminal antecedents. He is
only earning member of his family. There is no role attributed to him. He
is in custody since long. Investigation is over and no role found to be
attributed to him. The alleged acts are result of social and political
situation existing in the country. He is innocent and not connected with
any of the alleged activities. The other accused is responsible for the act.
No offence made out. Therefore, he shall be released on bail.
9. Ld. Special Prosecutor in his detailed say objected to bail
applications. The summary of his objections is that there is strong prima
facie case made out against the accused persons. It is clear that accused
persons shared common thought process and with view to achieve illegal
goal created Bullibai Application. The accused are members of certain
common groups active on social media, having brain washed ideology
against particular community. They had created a source code of this
Bullibai Application and photographs of women for auctioning. The
offence of promoting enmity clearly made out. They concealed their real
identity. They deliberately and maliciously acted to outrage religious
feelings. The material collected clearly reflect the role of each and every
3/8
-- 3 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
accused. Their acts have adverse ramifications to harmony of nation and
threat to integrity. There is possibility of repetition. Therefore, their
applications shall be rejected.
10. The summary of the arguments of the accused persons is that, their
submissions are in tune with their respective contentions. They pleaded
innocence and relied on facts transpired after investigation, contending
that no role attributed to them. Their connection is remote. Further,
majority of the offences not made out. Investigation is over. Jail is
exception and bail is rule. They also relied on some citations.
11. The submissions of Ld. Special Prosecutor are in tune with his
objections, as discussed above. No need of its repetition.
12. As mentioned above in Paragraph No.6, that the Accused No.4,
Neeraj Dashrath Bishnoi, withdrawn his application as he wants to apply
afresh, his application needs no consideration and only applications filed
by remaining accused persons are considered.
13. If we perused the grounds pleaded it is clear that almost in all the
applications similar grounds pleaded using different phraseology, mainly
stating that they are innocent and not connected with the alleged acts. The
investigation is over and charge sheet is already filed. No role attributed
to them. No offence made out and even if those offences are presumed to
be made out those are not much serious. They are of tender age, ready to
remain abide by the conditions, etc.
14. On perusal of charge sheet it is noticed that thorough investigation
is done and role all the accused persons transpired in the incidence. From
the contents of the final report it can be said that all these applicants are
involved in the alleged acts in one way or other. Therefore, it needs to be
scrutinized whether these facts are enough to reject the bail or prayer can
be considered in view of grounds pleaded? and for this purpose scrutiny
4/8
-- 4 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
of evidence collected during investigation is necessary. From such
scrutiny it can be inferred that Accused Nos.4 to 6, are the persons
associated with the creation of Application and uploading and
dissemination of information contained in it. Other accused persons i.e.
Accused Nos.1 to 3, followed them and did some ancillary activities.
Later on also, these persons followed instructions given by Accused
Nos.4 to 6, and tried to hide their identity. Thus, the role attributed to
Accused Nos.1 to 3, is less serious compared to Accused Nos.4 to 6.
15. Now the investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. Accused
persons are in custody since the month of January 2022, i.e. for
substantial period. The offences are triable by this court itself. The record
of investigation reflect that even if trial commences within short span of
time, its immediate conclusion is not possible as the whole evidence is of
technical nature, which is spread across country and which is going to
come on record. It will take substantial time.
16. Such evidence is of technical nature is based on documents
collected, which are in custody of third parties. The accused persons have
no control over those documents or evidence. All the witnesses are also
interested persons. Thus, possibility of tampering is almost nil. Further,
maximum punishment provided for the offences is not much high, which
will justify the non-consideration of prayer of bail of applicants.
17. It is alleged and has transpired from the final report that accused
persons created Application Bullibai, collected images of 100 reputed
women from particular community and uploaded those images along with
other data on this application, showing them to be commodity for auction.
The allegations are serious and have vide implications. The record also
reflects that the Accused Nos.4 to 6, deliberately created the Application.
Their intention appears malafide. It can be said that they uploaded and
5/8
-- 5 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
disseminated the information pertaining to women of particular religion
with intention to create hatred. Further, they though attained substantial
age of majority and understanding abused tender understanding and
immaturity of the other accused persons for this purpose by using their
social media platforms. As such their prayer for bail needs due
consideration in the light of role played by them and seriousness of
allegations.
18. Against it, Accused Nos.1 to 3, are of very tender age. They are
students. One of them is a girl and orphan, having nobody to take care. It
is also informed that they are having ensuing exams. If they are allowed
to remain in jail it will adversely affect their future prospects as well as
their upbringing.
19. The objections raised by prosecution can be meted by imposing
certain conditions. Therefore, prayer of the Accused Nos.1 to 3, needs due
consideration.
20. In this regard it is necessary to mention that the law relating to bail
is now well settled. The bail is rule and jail is an exception. The
observations of Supreme Court in the citations relied by accused persons
particularly Sanjay Chandra Vs. State ((2012)(1)SCC40), needs to be followed
parameters for consideration of bail plea are laid down and it is directed
that balance needs to be maintained between fundamental right of liberty
and necessity of detention. The above grounds needs to be weighed on
these parameters and it can be said the prayer of Accused Nos.1 to 3, can
be considered.
21. Thus, if allegations considered in the light of above discussed facts
and circumstances, the role played by applicants and their age, it can be
said that only Accused Nos.1 to 3, are entitled to bail, as they played
lesser serious role as compared to other accused persons. So also they are
6/8
-- 6 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
of tender age. Their immature age and understanding is misused by other
accused persons/applicants, who are of high age and deeper
understanding. It appears that acts committed with malafide intention.
Therefore, only Accused Nos.1 to 3, are entitled to bail with certain
conditions and other applications needs to be rejected. Accordingly, order-
ORDER
a. Bail applications bearing Nos.799/2022, 905/2022 and 989/2022
filed by accused persons Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha, Kumari Shweta Singh
and Mayank Pradeep Singh Rawat, are allowed and they are released on
bail on their furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.25,000/- each.
b. Accused Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha, Kumari Shweta Singh and
Mayank Pradeep Singh Rawat, shall furnish detailed addresses of
themselves, their parents and sureties and proofs thereof along with
phone/mobile numbers of all these persons.
c. Accused Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha, Kumari Shweta Singh and
Mayank Pradeep Singh Rawat, shall not tamper with prosecution
evidence or contact witnesses in any form and shall not leave India
without prior permission of this court.
d. Permission granted to deposit cash security provisionally for the
period of three months, instead of surety bond.
e. The parents or care takers, of these accused persons/applicants
Vishal Sudhirkumar Jha, Kumari Shweta Singh and Mayank Pradeep
Singh Rawat, if possible, make them avail the facilities to undergo
counseling for norms of social behaviour including behaviour on social
media.
f. Bail applications, bearing No.994/2022, filed by Accused No.5,
Omkareshwar Thakur and bail application filed by Accused No.6,
Neerajkumar Nunwa Singh, are rejected.
7/8
-- 7 of 8 --
C. C. No. 513 PW 2022 State Vs Kumar Vishal and Ors.
CNR MHMM18-001277-2022
g. Bail application bearing B.A. No.1060/2022, filed by Accused
No.4, Neeraj Dashrath Bishnoi, is also disposed off in view of fact that it
is withdrawn. It is clarified that said disposal of this application is not on
merits.
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 12.04.2022 M.M., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
8/8
-- 8 of 8 --