Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Aslam Sheikh @ Anwar on 8 August, 2023
Author: Prem Narayan Singh
Bench: Prem Narayan Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
ON THE 8 th OF AUGUST, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 17609 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION CHANDAN
NAGAR, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI KUSHAL GOYAL APPEARED FOR PETITIONER.
AND
ASLAM SHEIKH @ ANWAR S/O LATE SHRI
MOHAMMAD YUNUS, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SOCIAL WORKER GAFFUR KHA KI
BAJRIYA, BADWALI CHOWKI, DISTRICT INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NONE).
This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh under Section 439(2) read with section 482 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 20.10.2022 passed in BA. NO.5042/2022 in connection with FIR Number/Crime No.831/2022 of Police Station Chandan Nagar for the offence punishable under section 365, 386, 456, 506/34 and 376 and 376(2)(n), 392 of IPC whereby the learned trial Court granted bail to the respondent.
2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant has lodged an FIR on 27.09.2022 by stating that on 07.09.2023, the respondent alongwith co-accused Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 8/10/2023 11:53:46 AM 2 had reached on her house and forcefully entered in the house and possessed her mobile phone. They asked for password, but she has not told about the password. They abducted her son by threatening her that if the password of the mobile is not disclosed, they will kill her son. The respondent taken her mobile alongwith her son by directing her to call one Anvar Dastak and tell him about the password. Later on, she disclosed her password then her son left by them but the co-accused Anwar came to her house by chasing her son, he entered into the house and threaten her that if she disclose the incident to anyone, he will kill her son and left the place. Hence, the police has registered the FIR against the respondent and co-accused.
3. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the the learned trial Court has granted bail to the respondent by ignoring the material evidence available against him on record. It is further submitted that the respondent is having strong criminal records and the applicant is habitual offender. It is also submitted that when the case was fixed for hearing on bail in Crime No.974/2022 then the prosecutrix/complainant was prevented to file objection before the concerned Court and in this regard, an FIR under Section 195, 341 120-B and 506/34 of IPC was also registered against him. It is further submitted that without considering the gravity of the evidence, the learned trial Court has granted benefit of bail to the respondents, hence, the prays for cancellation of the bail of respondent.
4. I have heard the counsel for the State and perused the record.
5. From the face of record and FIR it is clear that the FIR was lodged belatedly by the prosecutrix and there is no plausible explanation regarding the said delay. It is also evident that the prosecutrix has leveled allegations regarding Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 8/10/2023 11:53:46 AM 3 abduction of son and mobile, but there is no statements of any person regarding such factum which can be corroborated. So far as the other offence against the applicant is concerned, for other offence no one can be kept in jail for indefinite period. The learned trial Court has also considered that the respondent was implicated being a political person and another FIR regarding Section 376 and 377 of IPC was earlier filed by the prosecutrix against the respondent. The petitioner is also unable to establish the facts against the respondent regarding misusing of liberty of the respective bail order
6. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid factum in its entirety and the finding of learned Trial Court regarding granting bail to the respondent, the application filed by the State under Section 439(2) of CrPC for cancellation of bail is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE amit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 8/10/2023 11:53:46 AM