Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chandan @ Chandar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 August, 2018
M.Cr.C. No.28551/18 1
(Bharti @ Lajo @ Lajwanti W/o Ramesh Ji Hotwani vs. State of M.P.)
M.Cr.C. No.29069/18
(Mangilal S/o Mahesh Khalotiya vs. State of M.P.)
M.Cr.C. No.29543/18
(Chandan @ Chander S/o Sohanlal Chouhan vs. State of M.P.)
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
Indore : 01/08/2018 :-
Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the
petitioner in M.Cr.C. No.28551/2018.
Shri M. Sharafat Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner
in M.Cr.C. No.29069/2018.
Shri A. Salim, learned counsel for the petitioner in M.Cr.C.
No.29543/2018.
Shri Suraj Sharma, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
ORDER
All the three bail petitions are for the same crime number, therefore, they are heard together and are being decided by this common order.
2. As per statement made by the accused/petitioners, this is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. before High Court in connection with Crime No.03/2018 under Section 396, 149, 302/149, 120-B, 201, 395, 328, 364 of IPC registered at Police Station - Tejaji Nagar, District-Indore. No other bail application has been preferred by them.
3. According to the prosecution case, on 01.01.2018, a female dead-body was found kept in a bag covered by a printed sheet at agricultural land of Jitendra near Purani Mandi Road. The police registered a Merg and started investigation. The dead-body was later identified as Durgabai. On postmortem, death was found homicidal caused by strangulation. The police registered crime. During investigation, M.Cr.C. No.28551/18 2 (Bharti @ Lajo @ Lajwanti W/o Ramesh Ji Hotwani vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29069/18 (Mangilal S/o Mahesh Khalotiya vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29543/18 (Chandan @ Chander S/o Sohanlal Chouhan vs. State of M.P.) it was revealed that the deceased was a cook and use to go to different houses to cook food. Her son Manohar, daughter-in- law Bhavna W/o Manohar and other daughter-in-law Payal revealed before the police that on 30.12.2017 i.e. two days prior to recovery of the dead-body, somebody called on their landline number and mobile number of the deceased from mobile No.8889820026. Before leaving home, the deceased told them that she has to go to cook food at Annapurna stating that somebody is calling her for cooking food. Acting on this clue, the police nabbed Smt. Rakhi and other four accused persons on 03.01.2018. They revealed that with the purpose to robe golden ornaments, they called the deceased on the pretext of cooking food. They offered her a Kachori in which they mixed sleeping pills. After having that Kachori, when the deceased lost her conscious, they strangulated her and after removing ornaments, threw her dead-body at the place from where later it was recovered. Petitioner - Bharti revealed that she got a golden bangle and black colour Lava Company Mobile with Sim, as a share of booty, which was later recovered from her house, petitioner - Mangilal revealed that he got one golden ring, one golden tops and one black colour Samsung Company Mobile with Sim, as a share of booty, which was later recovered from his house and petitioner - Chandan @ Chandar revealed that he got one golden chain and grey colour Micromax Company Mobile with Sim, as a share of booty, which was later recovered from his house. All the M.Cr.C. No.28551/18 3 (Bharti @ Lajo @ Lajwanti W/o Ramesh Ji Hotwani vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29069/18 (Mangilal S/o Mahesh Khalotiya vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29543/18 (Chandan @ Chander S/o Sohanlal Chouhan vs. State of M.P.) articles were duly identified by son of the deceased during trial. The police also recovered a piece of Kachori kept hiding in the kitchen of co-accused Smt. Rakhi, who has been granted bail. The police also collected call details of mobile No.8889820026 which is registered in the name of husband of co-accused Smt. Rakhi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners are claiming parity with Smt. Rakhi who is co-accused and has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04/07/2018 passed in M.Cr.C. No.2490/2018. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that at the time of filing missing person report, nothing is stated that while leaving house, the deceased was adoring any ornament, which was later recovered from their possession. It is also argued that petitioners are innocent and there is no evidence against them. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time. The petitioners are permanent resident of District-Indore. There is no possibility of their absconding. They are ready to furnish adequate security, therefore, they may be released on bail.
5. The Prosecution has opposed the bail application.
6. The accused are in custody since 03/01/2018, 03/01/2018 and 05/01/2018 respectively. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has already been filed. Trial is likely to take time.
7. Having regard to the evidence collected during investigation, parity and other facts and circumstances of the M.Cr.C. No.28551/18 4 (Bharti @ Lajo @ Lajwanti W/o Ramesh Ji Hotwani vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29069/18 (Mangilal S/o Mahesh Khalotiya vs. State of M.P.) M.Cr.C. No.29543/18 (Chandan @ Chander S/o Sohanlal Chouhan vs. State of M.P.) case, without commenting on merits of the case, all three petitions are allowed.
8. It is directed that the petitioner in M.Cr.C. No.28551/2018 - Bharti @ Lajo @ Lajwanti W/o Ramesh Ji Hotwani, petitioner in M.Cr.C. No.29069/2018 - Mangilal S/o Mahesh Khalotiya and petitioner in M.Cr.C. No.29543/2018 - Chandan @ Chander S/o Sohanlal Chouhan be released from custody on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the Trial Court, as and when required further subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The petitioners shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments on frivolous grounds to protract the trial;
(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly allure or make any inducement, threat or promise to the prosecution witnesses, so as to dissuade him from disclosing truth before the Court;
(iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or involve in any criminal activity;
(iv) In case of their involvement in any other criminal activity or breach of any other aforesaid conditions, the bail granted in this case may also be cancelled.
(Virender Singh) Judge Aiyer* Digitally signed by Jagdishan Aiyer Date: 2018.08.02 12:16:19 +05'30'