Back
2014 Supreme(MP) 1085
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT GWALIOR BENCH
D.K. Paliwal, J.
Prahlad - Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. - Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 4267-2014
Decided On : 11-07-2014
For the Petitioner:D.S. Tomar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mukund Bharadwaj, PP.
The change in witness statements and lack of opposition from the deceased's brother can be considered in favor of granting bail.
Headnote:
Bail Application - Criminal Law - The court allowed the bail application of the accused based on the statements of witnesses turning hostile, the non-opposition of the deceased's brother, and the fact that co-accused had been granted bail. The applicant was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a second bail application after the first one was dismissed. The applicant was arrested under various sections of the IPC for the alleged involvement in the disappearance and death of the complainant's brother.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application considering the statements of witnesses turning hostile, the non-opposition of the deceased's brother, and the fact that co-accused had been granted bail. The applicant was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail despite being accused in a serious criminal case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the change in witness statements, lack of opposition from the deceased's brother, and the bail granted to co-accused as factors in favor of granting bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the applicant to be released on bail with specific conditions.
D.K. Paliwal, J.
1. Heard.
2. This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The first bail application has been dismissed vide order dated 30.1.2014 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 8404/2013. The applicant has been arrested in Crime No. 33/2013 registered at Police Station, Bamorkala, District Shivpuri, under Sections 363, 302, 201, 34 of IPC.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 16.5.2013 at about 7.00 PM brother of the complainant namely Dayaram was found missing. Accordingly, the report was lodged against miscreants. During investigation, a doubt was raised by the complainant against the present applicant and others. Accordingly, crime was registered against the accused. During arrest of the present accused and on his information, dead-body of the missing Dyaram was recovered from the field of Kallu Kushwaha. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that after dismissal of the first bail application statements of Lalu (PW-2), Sanjiv Kumar (PW-3) and Girvar (PW-4) have been recorded. They have not supported the prosecution case. The co-accused are on bail. The applicant is in custody since 20.5.2013. Trial will take some time. Therefore, the applicant be released on bail.
5. The application is opposed by learned Public Prosecutor.
6. I have perused the statements of these witnesses. Lalu, Sanjiv Kumar and Girvar have turned hostile. Prakash (PW-1), who is brother of the deceased, has not stated anything against the applicant. Considering that the co-accused have been granted bail and the statements of PW-1 to PW-4 recorded during the trial, but without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.
7. 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; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
8. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
9. C.c. as per rules.
