Madhya Pradesh High Court
Salmaan @ Pappan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 October, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 30 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 46439 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SALMAAN @ PAPPAN S/O HUSSAIN KHAN, AGED ABOUT
22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR, R/O: CHIRGIPURA,
HOUSE NO. 03, P.S. STATION ROAD, RATLAM, DISTT.
RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI NILESH DAVE - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION MANAK CHOUK,
RATLAM, DISTT. RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI KAPIL MAHANT - PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the fifth application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 relating to FIR No.365/2017 registered at P.S. Manak Chowk, Ratlam, District Ratlam (M.P.) for the offence under Section 302/34 of IPC. He is in custody since 20.10.2017.
2. His earlier bail application has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 04.01.2023 passed in MCRC No.59256/2022.
3. As per prosecution story, date of incident is 22/09/2017 and complainant Neeraj Sakla lodged the F.I.R and stated that while deceased went Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 31-10-2023 10:22:03 2 through his motorcycle and at about 12 O'clock in night and two persons came through one Scooter and overtook the vehicle of deceased and caused gunshot injury to the deceased. Thereafter, P.S. Manak Chouk, Ratlam, Distt. Ratlam registered the offence u/s 302/34 of I.P.C. at Crime No. 365/17.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. Applicant is in custody since 20/10/2017, meaning thereby has already suffered jail incarceration for almost six years. Eyewitnesses Nishant (PW-4) and Neeraj (PW-5) have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case before the trial Court. No other eyewitness is available in the instant case. All the other prosecution witnesses have also been turned hostile. As per the status report, the case is pending for prosecution since 28/08/2018. 11 witnesses have already been examined and 35 witnesses are yet to be examined. Co-accused Ayaz has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 19.09.2023 passed in MCRC No.35640/2023 in the similar circumstances. Final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time. Hence, on the ground of parity the applicant be released on bail.
5. Per-contra, learned counsel for respondent / State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.
6. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case dairy.
7. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature of allegation as also taking note of the fact that as per the prosecution story, Nishant and Neeraj both are the only eyewitnesses in the case; although Nishant deposed against present applicant in examination-in-chief, but later on in para 7 and 8, he has turned hostile. Witness Neeraj has completely turned hostile; they have also denied that they have identified accused persons in their test identification parade; all the other Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 31-10-2023 10:22:03 3 witnesses regarding the fact have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution; the applicant is suffering jail incarceration for almost six years; other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail and final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time, in view of the evidence available on record, I deem it proper to release the accused / applicant on bail.
8. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required.
9. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.
10. It is made clear that if the applicant is again found to be involved in any other offence during the trial, this order shall stand cancelled automatically without reference to the Court and the police will be at liberty to arrest the applicant in the present case also. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Anushree Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 31-10-2023 10:22:03