Shahrukh@ Kalu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2021

[Cites 7, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shahrukh@ Kalu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2021

Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey

                                                                      1                        MCRC-22896-2020
                                         The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                   MCRC-22896-2020
                                                  (SHAHRUKH@ KALU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                 Jabalpur, Dated : 24-02-2021
                                        Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior counsel with Shri Pawan Gujar,

                                 learned counsel for the applicant.
                                        Shri Anand Nayak, learned PL for the respondent/State.

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is the first application under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail.

The applicant Shahrukh @ Kalu was arrested on 08.12.2019 in connection with Crime No.227/2019 registered at Police Station Junnardeo, Distt. Chhindwara (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 427, 120-B of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

As per prosecution case, in the intervening night of 23-24/07/2019, the applicant and other co-accused Kailash, Tahir, Ravi Belvanshi, Vasim, Raies, Iklakh and Saddam stole a sum of Rs.45,30,700/- from two ATM machines located at Main Branch, S.B.I., Junnardeo and Jaiswal Market, Junnardeo after cutting the ATM machines by the gas cutter. Police arrested the applicant on 08.12.2019 and seized Rs.1,50,000/- from the possession of the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. There is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Police only on the basis of memorandum of applicant, implicated him in the crime, while memorandum of applicant is not admissible in evidence against the applicant without other evidence. This Court has granted bail to other co-accused Majid Khan, Hashim, and Sabir vide order dated 14/02/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 50121/2020. The case of the applicant is similar to the other co-accused who have been granted bail by this Court, so applicant is also entitled to get bail Signature Not Verified SAN on the basis of parity. Applicant is in custody since 08.12.2019 and the Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.02.24 15:52:03 IST 2 MCRC-22896-2020 conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicant and other co-accused persons committed theft from two ATM machines after cutting those machines by gas cutter. Police seized Rs.1,50,000/- from the possession of the applicant. Other offences are also registered against the applicant. So, he should not be released on bail.

It appears from the record that there is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Police only on the basis of memorandum of the applicant implicated the applicant in the crime. So, looking to the strength of evidence collected by the police against the present applicant and the fact that he is in custody since 08.12.2019 and conclusion of the trial will take time, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned CJM/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.

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 trial;

3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court;

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

Signature Not Verified SAN

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.02.24 15:52:03 IST

3 MCRC-22896-2020 trial; and

6. The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE mn Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.02.24 15:52:03 IST

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court