Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lakhan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2022
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 14th OF FEBRUARY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 60882 of 2021
Between:-
LAKHAN SINGH S/O LT. VASUDEV SINGH , AGED
ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETD.
GOVERNMENT SERVANT VILLAGE SHIKARPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ARPIT SINGH, LEARNED COUSNEL)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THR. P.S. BARWAH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI VALMIK SAKARGAYEN, LEARNED GOVT. ADVOCATE AND
SHRI SHASWAT SETH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE OBJECTOR)
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for recall of the order dated 04.12.2021 passed by this Court in MCRC No.57295/2021.
The second bail application of the present applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. arising out of Crime No.487/2021 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B/34 of the IPC registered at Police Station Barwah, Dist. Khargone was rejected by order dated 04.12.2021 passed in MCRC No.57295/2021.
Counsel for the applicant submits that this Court has declined to grant bail considering the objection raised by the Objector that the impostor projecting himself to be Netrapal Singh got a power of attorney registered on 15.01.2021 in Registrar's office, Barwah. During the investigation, it is found in the CCTV footage that the present applicants were present in the Registrar's office. Counsel for the applicant submits that the aforesaid fact was incorrect. They were not present at the spot and were not found in the CCTV footage.
On going through the entire order dated 04.12.2021, it seems that the Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2022.02.14 17:54:59 IST aforesaid submission was raised by the learned counsel for the Objector. The bail 2 application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court on merits holding that it will not be proper to release the applicant Lakhan Singh till substantial prosecution evidence is recorded. For the same reason, other co-accused persons do not deserve the bail at this stage. This Court has further taken into consideration the judgment passed in the case of Virupakshappa Gouda & Anr. vs. State of Karnataka & Anr. (2017) 5 SCC 406 and thereafter held that considering the nature of accusation and severity of punishment and reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant, the Court declined the bail to the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any case for recall of the order. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
soumya
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.02.14
17:54:59 IST