Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh Choudhary vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 May, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.No.16783/2018
( Santosh Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P.)
Jabalpur, dated : 07.05.2018
Shri R.S. Mehndiratta, Advocate for applicant.
Shri Saurabh Shrivastava, Public Prosecutor for
Respondent/State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this 2 nd application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Dolariya, District Hoshangabad (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.153/2017 registered in relation to the offences punishable u/Ss. Of 294, 323, 506-II, 302, 304-I IPC.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application 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.
This is repeat bail application where allegation of murder is alleged against the applicant. The earlier application was dismissed on merits on 12.02.2018 in M.Cr.C. 3427/2018.
The new ground projected by learned counsel for the applicant is recording of statement of eyewitness (PW-1) Ramratan. The statements of Rajendra (PW-2), Narmada Prasad (PW-3) and Dr. A.S. Meena (PW-
4) have also been recorded. PW-4 Dr. A.S. Meena testifies that in pre MLC three injuries were found and none of them was in abdominal area whereas the postmortem report reflects that injury in abdominal area is the cause of death. More over the incident as reflected from the prosecution story is based on past animosity and on the issue of return of money, arguments took place which turned into altercation where applicant assaulted the deceased on this head and forearm as per the statement of the deceased recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. The assault was made with a stick lying at the spot. Thus, it appears that there was no pre-meditation on the part of the applicant and while fleeing from the 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.No.16783/2018 ( Santosh Chaudhary Vs. State of M.P.) spot, the applicant exhorted that next time the deceased will not be spared. From the above, it reflects that incident took place on the heat of moment and there may be absence of element of intention.
Considering the above and that the early conclusion of the trial is a bleak possibility and prolonged pre-trial detention is anathema to the concept of liberty and that there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant and the material placed on record does not discloses the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each of Rs.25,000/-, 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 an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
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.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.c. as per rules.
(Sheel Nagu) Judge sarathe Digitally signed by NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Date: 2018.05.07 19:00:14 +05'30'