Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mohansingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 January, 2018

       THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                     1
M.Cr.C. No.52/2018                  (Mohansingh vs. State of M.P.)


                       M.Cr.C. No.52/2018
                 (Mohansingh vs. The State of M.P.)


Indore, Dated: 12/01/2018

      Shri Manoj Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant.

      Shri Pankaj Wadhwani, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.

This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C on behalf of the applicant. The applicant has been arrested on 20.11.2017 in connection with Crime No.377/2017 registered at Police Station- Rajgarh District - Rajgarh (Biaora) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 353, 332 and 506 of IPC. The earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 1/12/2017 passed in M.Cr.C.24437/2017.

As per the prosecution story, the applicant, who is a Contractor, had slapped the complainant during official duty. Investigation is complete and the challan has been filed.

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no criminal antecedents recorded against the applicant. He further contended that the offence alleged against the applicant is triable by Magistrate. The applicant is in custody since 20.11.2017, therefore, under such circumstances the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, Shri Pankaj Wadhwani, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State has opposed the bail application and supported the order impugned. He contended THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH 2 M.Cr.C. No.52/2018 (Mohansingh vs. State of M.P.) that the offence of slapping a Government servant during official duty is a serious offence and prayed for rejection of bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the case diary, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for enlargement on bail, therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, the application deserves to be and is hereby allowed.

It is directed that applicant be enlarged on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lacs only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his regular appearance in the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and also comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.





                                                              (ROHIT ARYA)
                                                                JUDGE




             Moni         Digitally signed by Moni Raju
                          DN: c=IN, o=High Court of Madhya
                          Pradesh, ou=Administration,
                          postalCode=452001, st=Madhya
                          Pradesh,



             Raju
                          2.5.4.20=6fb601f03d4083a3289219
                          d85392bac3bde1be8a53bd80aeba
                          7af5a5244844c1, cn=Moni Raju
                          Date: 2018.01.13 12:10:12 +05'30'