Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J.
Firoz Mohammad – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 61775 of 2022
Decided On : 29-12-2022
Bail - Offences under M.P. Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and IPC - Applicant granted bail based on lack of direct involvement and completion of investigation.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for his alleged involvement in illegal transportation of cow progeny animals for slaughtering. He claimed innocence, stating that he was only the owner of the vehicle used and was not directly involved in the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the nature of allegations and the documents found in the vehicle, granted bail to the applicant, emphasizing that the documents were produced by a co-accused and that the applicant's custodial trial was not required as investigation had been completed.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for the alleged offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of direct involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime and the completion of the investigation, leading to the conclusion that the applicant deserved to be enlarged on bail.
Final Decision: The applicant was granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond and a solvent surety, with the direction to comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C.
JUDGMENT
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J. - This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the applicant as he has been arrested on 26.11.2022 in connection with Crime No.517/2022 registered at Police Station Maingaon, District Khargone (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 4, 6 & 9 of M.P. Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004, Sections 11-D of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of IPC.
2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.11.2022 co-accused persons, namely, Asif @ Ashu and Sampat Raj were found carrying about 13 cow progeny animals illegally in a truck bearing registration No.RJ-06-GC-2020 for the purpose of slaughtering. During investigation, it was found that the applicant being the owner of the vehicle was also involved in the crime and he along with other co-accused persons prepared forged and fabricated affidavit and certificates for carrying the aforesaid cow progeny.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Sampat Raj had shown his affidavit and certificate to the applicant about the cow progeny animals said to be found in the applicant's vehicle and on the basis of the aforesaid documents, applicant provided his vehicle to co-accused Sampat Raj. He was not involved in the crime and has only been implicated in the matter because he is the owner of the vehicle. He is in custody for about last one and half months. His custodial trial is not required. Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take considerable time. Therefore, he be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer. Having considered the rival submissions, nature of allegations leveled against the applicant and the fact that all the documents found in the vehicle was produced by the co-accused Sampat Raj and also considering the overall material produced on record, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, hence, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
5. It is directed that the applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with a solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before the Trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the Trial Court during the pendency of trial. It is further directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C.
6. This application is allowed and stands disposed of.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
The decision emphasizes that lack of direct involvement and completion of investigation can be grounds for granting bail, even in cases involving serious offences.
The completion of the investigation, filing of the charge sheet, and lack of requirement for further custodial interrogation are grounds for granting bail.
The court considered the triability of the offences, absence of cruelty to the animals, and the duration of the accused petitioners' custody in granting bail.
The principle of parity with co-accused and the requirement of legal evidence influenced the Court's decision in granting bail to the applicant.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C considering the period of custody and the circumstances of the applicant's non-appearance, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court granted bail to the applicant based on the ground of parity with a co-accused who had already been enlarged on bail, considering the circumstances of the seizure of the stolen vehicle.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, including the applicant's innocence, residency, and criminal history, without expressing an opinion on the merit of ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
