Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manmohan Sharma (Rawat) vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2019
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A. No.5328/2019
(Manmohan Sharma Vs. State of MP)
Gwalior, dated 28.06.2019
Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri K.P.S.Senger, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard and perused the case diary.
This second appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity 'the Atrocities Act') against the order dated 09.05.2019 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Shivpuri whereby the application of the appellant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail has been rejected in connection with Crime No.96/2019 registered at Police Station Khaniyadana, District Shivpuri for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC and section 3(1)(cha) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. His first appeal has been dismissed vide order dated 17.6.2019 passed in Cr.A. 2 No.4798/2019.
As per prosecution story, the complainant Rama lodged report at police station alleging that the present appellant had told him that his kutir has been sanctioned from the Government and it has also been informed that he will have to put his thump impression in the office of Tehsil. After some time he knew that his land was transferred by registered sale deed in the name of another person.
It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter. He further submits that neither he conspired, nor he has played any active role in the alleged incident. The appellant is in custody since 2.4.2019. The appellant is a Government servant and if he is put behind the bar for a long period, then it will adversely affect his service career, hence prays for grant of bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection and submits that the investigation is pending and challan has not been filed yet. Three cases of similar nature are also pending against the appellant.
Considering the submissions advanced by the counsel 3 for the rival parties and on perusal of the case diary, charge sheet has been filed and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this application in the following terms.
It is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The appellant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The appellant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The appellant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquitted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The appellant will not seek unnecessary adjournments 4 during the trial;
6. The appellant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance as well as copy of the order be given to the learned Public Prosecutor with a direction to keep the same in the concerned case diary.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava) Judge vv VALSALA VASUDEVA N VALSALA 2019.06.29 10:48:34 VASUDEVAN 2018.10.26 15:14:29 -07'00'
-07'00'