Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ankit@Rahul Rastogi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 July, 2024
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
1 MCRC-26526-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 16th OF JULY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 26526 of 2024
ANKIT@RAHUL RASTOGI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ankit Saxena - Advocate for applicant.
Shri C.P.S. Parmar - Government Advocate for respondent-State.
ORDER
This is an application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to FIR/Crime No.283/2023 dated 23.11.2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Bhopal District Bhopal for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B and 34 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is in custody since 25.11.2023 and there are as many as 137 witnesses and none of them have been examined as yet and the applicant is in custody for almost 9 months. It is contended by the counsel that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. [(2022) 10 SCC 51] as well as Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Anr. [(2014) 8 SCC 273] which has been recently considered by the Apex Court in the case of Md. Asfak Alam vs. The State of Jharkhand and Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.2207/2023) , the present applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail as none of the offences described punishment more than 7 years.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANOJ NAIR Signing time: 7/18/2024 2:44:01 PM2 MCRC-26526-2024
3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as many as 63 persons were duped at the behest of the present applicant and the co-accused and they had to part with their hard earned money and resultantly, an offence of cheating was committed, therefore the present applicant has been implicated, Thus, counsel submits that no case for grant of bail is made out against the applicant.
4. Heard the submissions and perused the case diary.
5. In view of the fact that the applicant is in custody since 25.11.2023 and during the course of trial, 137 witnesses are to be examined and despite having filing of the charge-sheet as of now, none of the witnesses have been examined.
6 . Thus, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration already been suffered by the present applicant as of now and taking into consideration the status of trial, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
7. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
8. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during the pendency of trial.
9. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
10. Accordingly, M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANOJ NAIR Signing time: 7/18/2024 2:44:01 PM3 MCRC-26526-2024 (MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE mn Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANOJ NAIR Signing time: 7/18/2024 2:44:01 PM