Madhya Pradesh High Court
Tulsiram Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 April, 2015
(Tulsiram Vs. State of M.P.) 1 M.Cr.C. No. 2182/15
10/04/2015
Shri N.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Sudha Shrivastava, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Shri Brijesh Kumar Tyagi, Advocate for the complainant This is the first application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for regular bail filed on behalf of applicant Tulsiram Gurjar.
The applicant is in custody since 07.12.2014 in connection with crime No. 366/2014 registered at Police Station Raghogarh, Distt. Guna for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of IPC.
It is alleged that complainant Rameshwar was accompanying with Mohan on motorcycle. When they reached near the area of Sagon trees garden, the applicant and other co-accused persons armed with Pharsa and Lathi with common object inflicted injuries to Mohan and complainant Rameshwar. When Dilip Kushwaha and band party came, the applicant and other co-accused persons left the place. Due to injuries Mohan died during his treatment. Rameshwar lodged Dehati Nalishi.
On behalf of the applicant, it is submitted that as per the prosecution case, applicant Tulsiram Gurjar and Vinay armed with Pharsa inflicted injuries to the complainant and deceased Mohan. However, Mohan died due to head injury, but as per the post-mortem report dated 25.10.10, there is no injury to Mohan by sharp cutting object. The applicant is said to have inflicted by only Pharsa. This version is not supported by the medical evidence. It is also contended (Tulsiram Vs. State of M.P.) 2 M.Cr.C. No. 2182/15 that Rameshwar received single abrasion only. Therefore, the applicant be given benefit of bail.
Learned counsel of the complainant also opposed the application on the ground that because of head injury, Mohan died.
On perusal of Dehati Nalishi, it is found that applicant Tulsiram and Vinay armed with Pharsa, co-accused Banwari, Kailash and Inder armed with Lathi inflicted injuries. It is also seen that applicant Tulsiram and Vinay inflicted injuries to Mohan Singh on the head. Because of which, he sustained injuries. Co-accused Banwari, Kailash and Inder inflicted injuries by Lathi. Complainant claimed that he sustained injuries on different parts of his body. MLC report of the complainant shows only one simple abrasion, whereas in the postmortem report of Mohan Singh, swelling at occipital temporal- front bone of the head and abrasion on the chest were found.
Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it proper to extend the benefit of bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed.
It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for securing his presence before the concerned Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will not interfere or influence the prosecution (Tulsiram Vs. State of M.P.) 3 M.Cr.C. No. 2182/15 witnesses;
2. The applicant will make himself available or represent through his counsel on early date of proceedings.
3. The applicant will not indulge in any similar offences during the pendency of the trial.
4. If the applicant found breach of any of the conditions above, the learned trial Court would be at liberty to reconsider on the question of bail.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.K. Palo) Judge VS