Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sugar Singh @ Sughar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 July, 2014
1 M.Cr.C.No.3110/2014
Sughar Singh alias Sughar
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh
09/07/2014
Shri N.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri A.K. Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. Heard on I.A.No.3575/14 which is an application under Section 301(2) of Cr.P.C., seeking permission to assist the public prosecutor.
In view of the averments made in the application, it is hereby allowed. Learned counsel for the complainant is permitted to assist the public prosecutor.
Further heard on the bail application.
Case-diary has been perused.
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
Applicant has been arrested on 10-03-2014 in connection with Crime No.23/2014 registered at Police Station Panihar District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 294/34 of IPC.
As per prosecution case, incident occurred on 21-02-2014 at about 2:30 pm and thereafter prompt report was lodged by Geeta Bai wife of injured Pappan Yadav at about 4:00 pm against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. In the FIR, it is alleged that Geeta and Pappan both were beaten by the applicant and other co- accused persons. Specific allegation has been made against the present applicant that by using sharp edged weapon axe he has caused one head injury to Pappan Yadav. In the FIR, it has also been specifically mentioned that one Farsa and axe blow was caused by 2 M.Cr.C.No.3110/2014 Jashwant Yadav and Sughar Singh respectively but only one incised wound was found present over the head of injured having size of 8cmx1cm bone deep.
Prayer for bail was made on the ground that in the present case applicant has been falsely implicated by the police. Investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has already been filed.
Prayer for bail was opposed by prosecution on the ground that sufficient evidence is available against the applicant, hence he does not deserve for any bail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and that applicant was not present on the spot, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court on the condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during the trial and shall also comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. and so also as imposed by the trial Court.
A copy of this order be sent for compliance to the Court concerned.
Certified copy as per rules.
(B.D. Rathi) Judge Anil*