Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod Kushwah @ Golu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 February, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MP 46
1 MCRC-3908-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-3908-2019
(VINOD KUSHWAH @ GOLU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 04-02-2019
Shri Sushil Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Sanjiv Kumar Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
The applicant has filed this second bail application u/S 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The first application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24-10-2018 in M.Cr.C.No.41993-2018.
The applicant has been arrested on 12/07/2018 by Police Station Kotwali, District Vidisha in connection with Crime No.350/2018 registered in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 323, 324, 427, 506 and 34 of the IPC.
Prosecution story in nutshell is that police personnel has received an information from the hospital through wireless set that one injured person Lokesh Kushwaha has been brought to the hospital in serious condition,when the police personnel went to the hospital and inquired into the matter and asked to the injured about the incident, he told that on 01/05/2018 at 9:30 PM, when the complainant was at his juice shop along with his friends, then four unknown persons came there and started abusing him, when the complainant stopped them, they started beating as well as assaulted with a knife, resulting into blood oozing out from his stomach and threatened him to kill and they ran away from the spot.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has falsely been implicated in the matter and he is not concerned directly or indirectly with the offence. It is submitted by Counsel for the applicant that the complainant as well as the other eye-witnesses have turned hostile. He is in custody since 12/07/2018. The FIR was lodged against unknown persons, therefore, prima-
2 MCRC-3908-2019 facie no offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out. It is submitted that charge sheet has been filed and no further custodial interrogation is required in the matter. It is submitted that applicant is permanent resident of Sindhi Colony, District Vidisha (M.P.) and he is ready to abide the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court and early conclusion of the trial is 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 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 and it is submitted that he is main accused of the case and injury has been caused by the applicant with the help of knife and knife has been recovered from the applicant. As per the MLC report, victim had suffered a fracture.
However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the complainant as well as other eye-witnesses have turned hostile and coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, 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 o n furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount 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 MCRC-3908-2019
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 concerned trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE Binu BINU PILLAI 2019.02.04 17:52:05 -08'00'