Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anees vs State Of M.P. on 29 July, 2020
Author: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
Bench: Sunil Kumar Awasthi
1 High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench at Indore Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.19466/2020 (Anees s/o Raees Mewati Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh) Indore, Dated 29.07.2020 Mr. Dharmendra Khanchandani, learned counsel for the applicant.
Ms. Archana Maheshwari, learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh.
They are heard. Perused the case diary / challan papers.
This first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime No.610/2019 registered at Police Station City Kotwali Mandsaur, District Mandsaur (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The applicant is in custody since 06.03.2020. 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 has submitted that applicant has no connection with the present 2 crime and he has falsely been implicated in the present crime. It is also submitted that the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor in the statement of eye witnesses recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 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 the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is not a legal evidence. The applicant is in custody since 06.03.2020. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. There is no possibility of his / her absconsion or tempering the evidence, if enlarged on bail. Conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. It is further submitted that co-accused Sunil has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21.01.2020 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.2396/2020, co-accused Jitendra has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.02.2020 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.2663/2020 and co- accused Anil has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.03.2020 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.10741/2020; and the case of the applicant is similar to them. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
3Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that although the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor in the statement of witnesses, however, his complicity with the co-accused persons who committed murder of Yuvraj Singh cannot be ruled out; and in furtherance to that common object, he conspired with co-accused persons Ankit, Chhotu @ Faizan and Lala Goswami to commit murder of deceased Yuvraj Singh. The present applicant was found with the co-accused persons near the place of incident before the incident on Tata Tiago Car and after the incident, the present applicant was absconding. He was arrested after 4 ½ months of the incident, which also shows his guilty mind. It is further submitted that broken SIM has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which was used for talking with the prime accused persons while committing the crime. The applicant is also having criminal record. Therefore, the case of the present applicant is not similar to co-accused persons Sunil, Jitendra and Anil, who have been granted bail by this Court. Under these circumstances, learned Panel Lawyer for the non applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he / she prayed for rejection of the application.
4Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the complicity of the present applicant with co-accused persons in committing murder of deceased Yuvraj Singh, this Court is of the view that at this stage no case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.19466/2020 has no merits and is hereby dismissed.
(S.K. Awasthi) Judge Pithawe RC Digitally signed by Ramesh Chandra Pithawe Ramesh Chandra Pithawe DN: c=IN, o=High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench Indore, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=dbcd6478673ed1cb472bfe4ff530b412bf73787574d3713fa86db0de124035d6, cn=Ramesh Chandra Pithawe Date: 2020.07.30 16:02:14 +05'30'