Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhaskar Datt Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 May, 2022
Author: Sanjay Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
ON THE 12th OF MAY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 22876 of 2022
Between:-
1. BHASKAR DATT MISHRA S/O SHRI UMADATT
MISHRA , AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILLAGE
NAUDHIYA NO.1, P.S. LAUR, DISTRICT REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NIKHIL MISHRA S/O SHRI BHASKAR DATT
MISHRA , AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE
NAUDHIYA NO 1, P.S. LAUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI PRAKASH UPADHYAY, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
P.S. LAUR REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY MS. SHWETA YADAV,GOVT. ADVOCATE )
This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This first application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of applicants for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.60/2022 registered at Police Station Laur, District Rewa for the offence punishable under Sections 397, 394, 412, 323 of IPC. The applicants Signature Not Verified SAN are in jail since 28.02.2022.
Digitally signed by SATYA SAI RAO Date: 2022.05.13 10:44:09 ISTLearned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants 2 have been falsely implicated in the alleged crime, which as per the prosecution said to have been committed by the son of the applicant no.1 and brother of applicant no.2 and after committing the said crime, the looted property was hide in the house of the present applicants. He further submits that in the memorandum of the accused who was involved in the crime, it is not disclosed that the present applicants were also involved in the crime, but from the memorandum of the present applicants it reflects that they have supported the accused who had looted the property and hide the same in their house. He submits that the memorandum is not admissible and except that memorandum, nothing has been collected by the prosecution to indicate the involvement of the present applicants in the alleged crime.
On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the looted property was seized from the house of the present applicants and, therefore, they are not entitled to be released on bail.
Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case-diary and the fact that the accused who looted the property is also residing in the same house where the present applicants reside and, therefore, if the said property is recovered from the said house, the involvement of the present applicants except their confession in the memorandum, prima facie does not appear to be justified and, therefore, I am inclined to enlarge the applicants on bail, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.
It is directed that the applicants be released on bail upon their furnishing Signature Not Verified SAN personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) 'each' with one Digitally signed by SATYA SAI RAO Date: 2022.05.13 10:44:09 IST solvent surety of the like amount 'each' to the satisfaction of the trial Court 3 concerned for their appearance on the dates given by it.
I t is further directed that the applicants shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Certified Copy as per rules.
(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE rao Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SATYA SAI RAO Date: 2022.05.13 10:44:09 IST