Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shakur Saiyad Shabbir @ Rana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 March, 2020
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-10436-2020
(Shakoor Saiyad Shabbir @ Rana Bhai Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated : 17/03/2020
Shri P.S. Bhadauriya, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Vinay Kumar, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this fourth application u/S. 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The first application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15/05/2018 passed in MCRC No.17468/2018 and second application was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 11/09/2019 passed in MCRC No.36381/2019 and third application was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 20/09/2019 passed in MCRC No.39255/2019.
The applicant has been arrested on 25/10/2017 by Police Station- Barohi, District- Bhind in connection with Crime No.80/2017 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C of IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act.
Prosecution story, in short, is that on the tip of Jitendra @ Jeetu, Police recovered lower denomination currency notes of Rs.100 (410 notes), Rs.50 (10 notes) from the possession of accused- Kartar Singh. 2 In the memorandum prepared under Section 27 of Evidence Act, Co- accused Kartar Singh admitted that he brought these fake currency notes from the applicant- Shekh Shakoor Saiyyad @ Rana Bhai resident of Beed Aurangabaad, Maharashtra. Upon further investigation, the currency notes of Rs.100 (15 packets) were seized. Apart that, one HP colour printer, 220 pages having embossment of Rs.100, 90 pages having embossment of Rs.50 and other material relating to preparation of fake currency has also been seized. On the basis of aforesaid, crime has been registered against him.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter. Charge-sheet has been filed and further custodial interrogation is not required. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that most of prosecution witnesses have been examined, they have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. The applicant is in confinement since 25/10/2017 thus, he has suffered more than 1/4 th of the sentence prescribed for the offences mentioned above. Since most of prosecution witnesses have already been examined, therefore, the chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence/witness is remote and early conclusion of the trial is a bleak possibility and prolonged pre-trial detention is an anathema to the concept of liberty. Under these grounds, applicant prays for grant of bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application 3 and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
After hearing aforesaid arguments and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed but with certain stringent conditions and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with two solvent sureties each of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him.
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself 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 applicant shall not commit any other 4 offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. Till conclusion of the trial, the applicant shall appear and mark his attendance before the concerned trial Court once in every month.
A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.A. Dharmadhikari) Judge rahul RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR 2020.03.18 17:13:00 +05'30'