Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 March, 2020
Author: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
Bench: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
M.Cr.C. No.10741/2020 1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.10741/2020
(Anil vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh )
Indore, Dated: 16/03/2020
Shri N.J. Dave, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Manish Verma, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard, Case-diary perused.
This application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant- Anil who is implicated in connection with Crime No.610/2019, registered at Police Station-City Kotwali, District-Mandsaur, for commission of offence punishable under Section Sections 302, 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC, 1860 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
On the basis of report lodged by complainant Bachchu Singh at Police Station City Kotwali Mandsaur, District Mandsaur (MP), offence of committing murder of his son Yuvraj Singh with deadly weapon has been registered against the present applicant and others.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a youth aged about 23 years and he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. Applicant is neither named in the FIR nor in the statement of eye witnesses recorded under Section 161 as well as 164 of Cr.P.C 1973. No article relating to the offence has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant is implicated in the present crime only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused persons namely, Ankit Tanwar, Chhotu @ Faijan and Lala @ Nagesh Goswami, recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is not legal Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 17/03/2020 10:09:59 M.Cr.C. No.10741/2020 2 evidence. The applicant is in custody since 12/10/2019. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. There is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering the evidence, if enlarged on bail. Conclusion of trial will take considerable time. Co- accused Sunil has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 21/01/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.2396/2020 and the case of the applicant is similar to him. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Learned Public Prosecutor submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail, hence the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, with a condition that he/she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.
This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. K. AWASTHI) JUDGE sumathi Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 17/03/2020 10:09:59