Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajendra @ Supari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11274
1 MCRC-11891-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 29th OF APRIL, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11891 of 2025
RAJENDRA @ SUPARI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Mukesh Sinjonia, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Virendra Khadav, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
ORDER
This first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the applicant - Rajendra @ Supari S/o Badrilal for grant of regular bail, who has been arrested on 27.11.2024 in connection with Crime No.257/2019, registered at Police Station Maheshwar, District Khargone (M.P.) for commission of offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323, 332, 353, 394 and 120(B) of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 31.10.2019 in M.Cr.C.No.44109/2019. The applicant did not appear before the learned trial Court for complying the aforesaid order for sufficient long time. He was arrested on 27.11.2024 and since then he is suffering incarceration. The facts Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 29-04-2025 18:28:13 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11274 2 MCRC-11891-2025 of anticipatory bail has been mentioned in the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 by the trial Court. Applicant has been arraigned as accused on the ground of apprehension that he has hatched the conspiracy which has resulted in attack on the police party which have gone to the house of Kavita Bai and Prahlad for seizing the liquor on the information given by the informant. Co-accused have been granted bail and there is no specific role assigned to the applicant and assault has also not been made by the applicant. Sufficient evidence is not available on record to establish the complicity of the accused with the alleged crime. Investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. There is no likelihood of his absconsion leaving his family, home and profession and also there is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by applicant. Conclusion of the trial will take considerable long time, therefore, learned counsel prays for allowing the bail application and for grant of bail.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has vehemently opposed the prayer and prays for dismissal of the application on the ground that 26 criminal antecedents are reported against the applicant vide crime nos.325/2009, P.S. Kasrawad u/s 34(1), 34(1)a, 34(2) of Excise Act, 229/2011, P.S.Balakwada u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 78/2013, P.S. Barud u/s 279,337,338 of IPC, 330/2014, P.S.Maheswar u/s 34(2), 36, 46 of Excise Act, 445/2014, P.S. Sendhwa u/s 34(1)a, 34(2), 36, 40A of Excise Act, 144/2016, P.S. Kasrawad u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 52/2016, P.S. Sendhwa u/s 34(2) of Excise Act and 120-B of IPC, 251/2016, P.S. Sendhwa u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 258/2019, P.S. Maheshwar u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 29-04-2025 18:28:13 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:11274 3 MCRC-11891-2025 305/2019, P.S. Maheshwar u/s 34(2) of Excise Act and Sec.420,467,468 of IPC, 285/2024, P.S. Maheshwar u/s 318(4), 337,338,336(3),340(2) of BNS, 52/2016, P.S. Mandleshwar u/s 120-B of IPC, 34(2) of Excise Act, 144/2016, P.S. Kasrawad u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 460/2017, P.S. Kasrawad u/s 34(1) of Excise Act, 194/2017, P.S. Kukshi u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 234/2017, P.S. Maheshwar u/s 34(1), 36A of Excise Act, 602/2021, P.S. Maheshwar u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 898/2020, P.S. Laudiya u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 36/2021, P.S. Shipra u/s 34(2), 42 of Excise Act, 481/2021, P.S. Manpur u/s 279 IPC, 34(2), 46 of Excise Act (on bail), 275/223, P.S. Khargone u/s 34(2) of Excise Act (on bail), 116/2021, P.S. OOn u/s 420 of IPC, 34(2) of Excise Act, 422/2023, P.S. Sagaur u/s 34(2) of Excise Act, 36/2021, P.S. Sanwer u/s 34(2) of Excise Act (on bail), 251/2016, P.S. Kasrawad u/s 34(2) of Excise Act (on bail).
4. In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that in most of the cases he has been acquitted.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, looking to the criminal antecedents against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant benefit of bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the regular bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 stands dismissed.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE RJ Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 29-04-2025 18:28:13