Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nepal Singh @ Rampal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 June, 2016
1
M.Cr.C. No.7069/2016
(Nepal Singh @ Rampal Vs. State of M.P.)
29.06.2016
Shri R.K. Shrivastava, Advocate for applicant.
Ms. Sudha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for
Respondent/State.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. The applicant has filed this first application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Ishagarh, District Ashoknagar in connection with Crime No.174/2016 registered in relation to the offences punishable u/S. 34 (2) of the Excise Act.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Considering the facts that applicant is in custody since 03.06.2016 and the prosecution story discloses alleged offence u/S. 34 (2) of Excise Act which prescribes for maximum punishment of three years and that 70 bulk litres of country made liquor has been seized from the applicant and reading of the case diary does not indicate the presence of the criminal antecedents of the applicant and that prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in 2 M.Cr.C. No.7069/2016 the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
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 investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial.
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. Till conclusion of investigation, the applicant will mark his attendance at the concerned Police Station once in every week.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
C.c. as per rules.
(Sheel Nagu) Judge SS