Madhya Pradesh High Court
Israr vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 April, 2016
-1-
MCRC No.2851/2016
22-04-2016
Mr Anand Mohan Mathur, Sr. Counsel with Abhinav P. Dhanodkar,
learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr A.S. Sisodiya, learned counsel for the respondents State.
Heard.
Case diary perused.
This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 09-12-2015 in connection with Crime No.698/2015 Registered at police station Dhar for the offence punishable under Section 153, 153-A, 188, 147, 149, 124-A of the I.P.C..
The First Information Report which was lodged on 08-12-2015 at 08:30 PM by the Sub-Inspector of Police Ajay Tiwari reveals that the applicant was part of a procession on 07-12-2015 and certain insulting slogans were raised in the procession on 07-12-2015. The First Information Report further reveals that on 06-12-2015 a procession took place and certain black flags were shown to the members of the Kshatriya Maratha Samaj. The First Information Report further reveals that allegations were raised against Chatrapathi Shivaji and against Hindu Maratha Samaj and Hindu Samaj.
Learned Sr. Counsel Shri Anand Mohan Mathur has vehemently argued before this court that procession has certainly took place on 07-12-2015 with due permission of District Administration and the Station House Officer of the area. The Tehsildar and number of Constables were present and no such incident is reported by them. He has vehemently argued before this court that only on account of pressure exerted by certain Hindu Organizations, First Information Report has been lodged against the petitioner who has not committed any offence at any point to time u/s 153-A and 124-A of the Indian Penal Code.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent State has vehemently argued before this court that the applicant was part of the procession and certain slogans were raised against the nation -2- as well as against the Hindu Samaj and, therefore, offence has certainly been committed u/s 153-A and 124-A of the I.P.C. He has also stated that there are seven other cases against the present applicant and, therefore, the question of grant of bail doesn't arise.
This court has carefully gone through the case diary. Investigation in the present case is already over and the charge sheet has been filed in the matter. The documents which are part of the charge sheet relates to a complaint lodged by Maratha Samaj dated 07-12-2015. Another complaint is by Vishwa Hindu Parishad dated 07-12-2015 which relates to some incident which took place on 06-12-2015 and certain black flags were shown to the members of the Kshatriya Maratha Samaj. There is another complaint dated 27-12-2015 addressed to Hon'ble the Chief Minister by Shiv Sena. Other complaints are also on record filed by certain Organizations, who are alleging themselves to be a Savior of Hindusum. The incident is of dated 07-12-2015. The entire investigation is already over.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the statement available in the case diary and after hearing the learned counsel for the respondent State who has vehemently opposed the application for grant of bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I allow this bail application and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court for his appearance before the Trial Court on all the dates fixed in this behalf by the court concerned during trial.
C.C. as per rules.
(S. C. SHARMA) JUDGE RP