Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chandra Shekhar Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 April, 2016
1 M.Cr.C. No. 4384/2016
Chandra Shekhar Kushwah Vs. State of M.P.
26.04.2016
Shri Devendra Sharma, counsel for the applicant.
Shri B.P.S. Chauhan, Public Prosecutor for the State/
respondent.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
This is the repeat application of the applicant, whereas his previous application was dismissed on 08.01.2016 being withdrawn with the liberty that it may be repeated after three months.
The applicant is in custody since 06.10.2015 relating to Crime No.498/2015 registered at Police Station Padav, District Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 of IPC and Section 3/4 of M.P. Examination Act, during investigation Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC were added.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a youth of 25 years of age, who has no criminal past alleged against him. It is alleged by the co-accused Ashish under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that the applicant was the person, who had committed forgery of his voter identification card. However in consequence of that statement, nothing was recovered from the co-accused Ashish or the applicant and, therefore, memo under Section 27 of the Evidence Act given by the co-accused Ashish is not admissible. The applicant has mentioned in his statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that since photo on voter identification card was not clear, therefore, the applicant pasted the photo of Ashish as provided by Ashish himself and got the card laminated. The applicant has done his act in bonafide manner. After his arrest, one of such similar case has been registered against the applicant without any reason. No offence of forgery was done by the applicant. He is in custody without any substantial reason. The applicant was released on bail in a similar case vide 2 M.Cr.C. No. 4384/2016 order dated 18.02.2016 in M.Cr.C. No. 12095/2015. The applicant is a youth of 25 years of age and looking to the complexity of the case, sufficient time will be required for its disposal. The applicant cannot be kept in the custody for an unlimited period otherwise his future will be spoiled in the bad company of hardened criminals inside the jail. Under these circumstances, the applicant prays for bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the bail application and submits that if the applicant is released on bail, he may escape.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I am of the view that application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant may be accepted. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.
It is directed that the applicant namely Chandra Shekhar Kushwah be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with two surety bonds each of Rs.40,000/- to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior, to appear before the committal Court and the trial Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.
However, it is made clear that out of the aforesaid two surety bonds, one surety bond shall be solvency duly verified by the concerned Tahsildar. The trial Court shall release the applicant after getting his address proof and photo identity proof issued by the competent authority. Copy of such document be taken on record.
This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(N.K. Gupta) Judge Abhi