Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mayank Singh @ Sangram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 September, 2020
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran, Ajay Rastogi
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 594 OF 2020
(@ out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3184/2020
MAYANK SINGH @ SANGRAM SINGH …Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH …Respondent
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This appeal challenges the final order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur in MCRC No.5915/2019.
The appellant and five others are charged for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B,109, 176, 212, 34 IPC read with Section 25 & 27 Arms Act and are facing prosecution in Sessions Trial No.161 of 2018.
Out of 65 witnesses cited by the prosecution to be examined in support of its case, only six witnesses have been examined so far.
Out of the six accused persons, three accused are already on bail and the appellant has been in custody since 28.03.2018.
Our attention was invited to the examination of PW-3 named Signature Not Verified Adarsh Singh. During the course of his examination, a CD was played Digitally signed by INDU MARWAH Date: 2020.09.15 15:20:55 IST Reason: in Court and the observations of the Court in para 34 of the deposition show that a person wearing dark colour shirt and red 2 Gamchha was the one who fired the shot. We are not at this juncture considering the liability of the appellant in the crime in question. But, as accepted in the deposition, the appellant was certainly not the person who was wearing dark colour shirt and red Gamchha. We, therefore, consider it appropriate to extend the relief under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the appellant. We order accordingly. The appellant shall be produced before the Trial Court within three days. Subject to such conditions which the Trial Court may deem appropriate, including the condition that the appellant shall present himself and participate in the proceedings on every given date in the Sessions Trial, he shall be released on bail. Any violation of the terms and conditions of bail shall entail in cancellation of bail.
We shall not be taken to have reflected on the merits of the matter and the matter shall be gone into on individual merits at every juncture.
The appeal is allowed in aforesaid terms.
........................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT) .......................J. (VINEET SARAN) .......................J. (AJAY RASTOGI) New Delhi, September 14, 2020.
3
ITEM NO.19 Court 4 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3184/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16-03-2020 in MCRC No. 5919/2020 passed by the High Court Of M.P.Principal Seat At Jabalpur) MAYANK SINGH @ SANGRAM SINGH Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s) Date : 14-09-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikas Upadhyay, Adv, Mr. Anshuman Ashok, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv, UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (PRADEEP KUMAR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
(SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE)