Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajneet Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 9 June, 2016
M.Cr.C. No. 6287/2016
(Rajneet Singh Vs. State of M.P.)
09.06.2016
Shri S.S. Gautam, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Rajendra Singh Yadav, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Case diary is perused.
On behalf of the applicant, this application is preferred under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail for alleged offence offences of Section 379 of IPC. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.515/2015 registered at Police Station Eshagarh, District Ashoknagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a youth of 19 years of age, who has no criminal past alleged against him as such. One criminal case was registered against the applicant in the past, but he was not convicted in it. The present case is triable by the Court of Magistrate and therefore, it is not so grave. The stolen property has already been recovered and therefore, no recovery is required from the applicant. Under these circumstances, applicant prays for anticipatory bail.
It is further submitted that another co-accused Jitu alias Jitendra in the same crime number has been granted the benefit of anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.05.2016 passed in M.Cr.C. no. 5112/2016.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the application.
Keeping in view the submissions made by learned M.Cr.C. No. 6287/2016 counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Consequently, this application of applicant under Sec 438 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
Accordingly, without expressing opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this application u/S 438 Cr.P.C in the following terms.
It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.c. as per rules.
(Anand Pathak) Vacation Judge sh/-