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 9, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Deepak Wanshkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 August, 2017

                     MCRC-12879-2017
         (DEEPAK WANSHKAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


03-08-2017

Shri Rahul Gupta, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Akhilendra Singh, Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.

Heard on this first application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of the petitioner Deepak Wanshkar in crime no.643/2017 registered by P.S.-Katni (Kotwali) District- Katni under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 291, 294 and 324 of the IPC.

As per the prosecution case, on 06.05.2017, there was an altercation between first informant Monu and deceased Ajay on one hand and accused persons Ajit Mehtar and Ajju Mehtar on the other. Thereafter, on 07.05.2017, co- accused persons Ajit, Prince, Rahul, Azad, petitioner Deepak and 3 or 4 other unknown co-accused persons went near old mine village-Barghava and assaulted first informant Monu and deceased Ajay with sharp edged weapons, resulting in his death.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only evidence against him is the statement made by Monu Patel; wherein, he has stated that Ajit, Prince, Rahul and Ajju were accompanied by 3 or 4 unknown persons. During identification parade, Monu identified petitioner Deepak as one of the assailants; however, the statement of Monu reveals that mainly it was co-accused Ajju Mehtar, who had assaulted the deceased with knife. No specific role has been ascribed to unknown persons who were also said to have assaulted the deceased. The fact remains that the petitioner was not named in the first information report. He has been in custody since 20.05.2017; therefore, it has been prayed that the petitioner be released on bail. It has further been submitted that co-accused Ajaz Wanshkar has already been released on bail.

Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State on the other hand has opposed the application inviting attention of the Court to the fact that Azad was not identified by Monu.

However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety, particularly the facts as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the opinion of this Court, petitioner deserves to be released on bail.

Consequently, this first application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of the petitioner Deepak Wanshkar is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 80,000/- with one solvent surety in the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that Court on all dates fixed in the case and for complying with the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Certified copy as per rules.

(C V SIRPURKAR) JUDGE vai