Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narayan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 April, 2015
M.Cr.C.No.2276/2015 (Narayan Singh Vs. State of M.P.)
1
17.4.2015.
Shri T.C.Narwariya, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri R.S.Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Shri Deepak Shrivastava, Advocate for the complainant Heard on I.A.No.2165/2015, an application under Section 301(2) of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the complainant for permission to assist State counsel.
This application is allowed and learned counsel for the complainant is permitted to assist State Counsel within the purview of Section 301(2) of Cr.P.C Heard on bail application.
Perused the case diary.
This is second bail application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. First application (M.Cr.C.No.12313/14) has been dismissed vide order dated 5.01.2015.
The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.597/2014 registered at Police Station, Civil Line Vidisha, District Vidisha, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC.
As per prosecution case, the complainant has lodged a complaint alleging therein that the applicant alongwith co- accused persons has played fraud with the complainant and sold some piece of land to her knowingly that it was not partitioned. On the basis of aforesaid, the case has been registered against M.Cr.C.No.2276/2015 (Narayan Singh Vs. State of M.P.) 2 the applicant and co-accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of the first bail application, the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in custody since 9.12.2014. Learned counsel also read over the statement of the complainant Arti Patel and submits that after registry of the land, applicant and others also handed over the possession of the land to her and she is still cultivating the land. It is further submitted that applicant shall abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court. In such premises, applicant prayed for bail.
The prayer is opposed by learned Panel Lawyer submitting that there are total six accused in the case and except the applicant, all others are absconding.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, no new ground is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, this bail application is hereby dismissed.
(Sushil Kumar Gupta) Judge ms/-