Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajeem Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 March, 2020
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1 MCRC-9444-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-9444-2020
(AJEEM KHAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Gwalior, Dated : 02-03-2020
Shri Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri Sanjeev Mishra, Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. This is first application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with Crime No.124/2010 registered at Police Station Phooph, District Bhind, for the offences punishable under sections 392 of the IPC and 11/13 of the MPDVPK Act.
Prosecution story, in short, is that applicants along with other accused persons had committed loot of tractor-trolley in the year 2010.
Learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. They have been implicated on the basis of memorandum recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act. They are not named in the FIR. Eight persons have been acquitted by the trial Court. It is further submitted that the co-accused person has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dt.03.02.2020 passed in M.Cr.C.No.4844/2020. They are the permanent resident of Village Setli, Didoli, Amroha (U.P.) and there is no likelihood of their absconsion. They is ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is made.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection. It is submitted that the applicants have been absconding.
In response, learned counsel for the applicants submits that neither the applicants were declared as an absconder nor any proceeding under sections 2 MCRC-9444-2020 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C were ever initiated against them.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants, though on comparatively stringent conditions.
It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of applicants namely Ajeem Khan and Bhura Khan shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac only) by each of the applicant with two solvent and local sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) each to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by applicants:-
1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them.
2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicants will not indulge in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
5. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
6. If the applicants commits any offence while on bail, then this order shall automatically stand cancelled without reference to the Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI 2020.03.02 18:29:05 +05'30' VALSALA VASUDEVAN 2018.10.26 15:14:29 -07'00' 3 MCRC-9444-2020 vpn