Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shivkumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 October, 2023

Author: Anil Verma

Bench: Anil Verma

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                              ON THE 13 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44967 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    SHIVKUMAR S/O SHRI RAMAKANT BHARGAV
                                 OCCUPATION: LABOUR WARD NO. 23, DAHOD
                                 ROAD, AKANSHA NAGAR, MANDIDEEP, RAISEN
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    MAKHAN BAIRAGI S/O VASUDEV BAIRAGI
                                 OCCUPATION: LABOUR GRAM PIPLIYA POST
                                 SAGAUR DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPLICANTS
                           (BY SHRI ASHISH JOSHI, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION KOTWALI,
                           DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI KAPIL MAHANT, PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

                           following:
                                                              ORDER

Applicants have filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.662/2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dhar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 456, 295-A, 153-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 16 and 30 of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The applicants are in custody since 13.09.2023.

2. As per prosecution story, on 10/09/2023 Conservation Assistant, ASI Prashant Patankar submitted a written complaint at Police Station Kotwali stating that some unknown persons have entered the Bhojshala and Kamal Maula Masajid, situated at Goushala, Dhar which comes under ASI by breaking lock of back gate and attempted to install an idol. They have caused prejudice to the communal harmony in the society. On the basis of the memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, present applicants have been implicated in this offence. Accordingly, offence has been registered against the applicants.

3 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this offence. The applicants are in custody since 13/09/2023. The involvement of the present applicants is not proved in the CCTV footage. No idol has been recovered from the aforesaid spot or from the possession of the present applicants. Co- accused namely Ravi Choudhari and Manoj have been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.10.2023 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.45099/2023 and 44169/2023. Investigation is almost over. There is no evidence available on record to connect the applicants with the aforementioned offence. Applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 are the permanent resident of District Raisen and District Dhar respectively and final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail applications and prays for its rejection. However, he fairly admits that no criminal antecedent is found against the present applicants.

5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.

6. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and as per the prosecution story, no idol has been found from the place of incident; the applicants are not seen in the CCTV footage; nothing has been recovered from their possession; other co-accused have been granted bail on similar circumstances; investigation is almost over and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release the applicants on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

7. It is directed that applicants be released on bail on their each furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. They shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE VS Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 16-10-2023 14:30:13