Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bobyraja @ Raghvendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 July, 2020
Author: Jagdish Prasad Gupta
Bench: Jagdish Prasad Gupta
1 CRA-3196-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-3196-2020
(BOBYRAJA @ RAGHVENDRA SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Jabalpur, Dated : 01-07-2020
Shri D.S. Baghel, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Punit Shroti, PL for the respondent/State.
Shri B.J. Chourasiya, Advocate for the objector. Matter is heard through video conferencing.
This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 23.04.2020 passed by the Special Judge under S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Chhatarpur in CIS No. 279/2020 whereby the Court-below has dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
The appellant is in custody since 07.03.2020 for the offences under Sections 307, 294, 34 of IPC and Sections 3 (1) (d), 3(1)(dh) and 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Crime No. 226/19 registered by Police Station Gadhi Malahara, District-Chhatarpur.
Allegation against the appellant is that in furtherance of common intention, co-accused who is son of the appellant fired from the pistol and caused injury to the victim on his left leg and at that time, the appellant also made fire in air.
It is submitted that the appellant is innocent. He is in custody since 07.03.2020. Charge sheet has been filed. The trial will take time in disposal of the case. It is further submitted that FIR has been lodged after two days of the incident because the appellant is father of co-accused. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no likelihood of his absconding. Hence, he be released on bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer and objector has opposed the aforesaid contention and submitted that the appellant has criminal antecedents. The incident was taken place to compel the victim for compromising in earlier criminal case. Under such circumstances, if the appellant is enlarged on bail, Digitally signed by PANKAJ NAGLE Date: 01/07/2020 16:15:51 2 CRA-3196-2020 he will again intimate to the victim. Hence, the application be rejected.
Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and in view of this Court, at present, the appellant is not entitled to release on bail. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
However, the appellant would be at liberty to file fresh application after recording the statement of victim or after six months, in case, the statement of victim is not recorded.
CC as per rules.
(J. P. GUPTA) JUDGE pn Digitally signed by PANKAJ NAGLE Date: 01/07/2020 16:15:51