Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Subodh Abhyankar, J.
Ganiya @ Ganu – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh Station – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.9217 of 2022
Decided On : 22-02-2022
Bail - Criminal Procedure Code - The court allowed the bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. based on the conclusion that the trial is likely to take a long time and the material witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a third bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for offences under IPC and arms act. The earlier bail applications were dismissed, and the applicant has been in custody since 18.2.2021.
Finding of the Court:
The court found force with the contentions raised by the counsel for the applicant and allowed the bail application without reflecting on the merits of the case. The applicant was directed to be released on bail with certain conditions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the progress of the trial and the lack of support from material witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the likelihood of a long trial duration and the lack of support from material witnesses, leading to the grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail with specific conditions, including a personal bond and surety, and a warning of cancellation in case of involvement in any other offence during the trial.
JUDGMENT
Subodh abhyankar, J. - They are heard and perused the case diary.
This is applicant's third bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.45/2021 registered at Police Station-Tanda, District-Dhar MP) for offence punishable under Sections 363, 365, 342, 506 of the IPC and 25-B of the arms act. The applicant is in custody since 18.2.2021.
applicant's earlier bail applications No. 63492/2021 and 44418/2021 were dismissed by this Court as withdrawn vide orders dated 03.1.2022 and 22.9.2021 respectively.
Counsel for the applicant has submitted that now the material witnesses have already been examined in court and not supported the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 13.3.2021 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail
Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out.
On due consideration of the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary as also the deposition of the material witnesses and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, this Court finds force with the contentions raised by the counsel for the applicant. accordingly, without reflecting anything on the merits of the case, the application filed by under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant is hereby allowed.
The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
It is further observed 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.
The decision to grant bail was based on the likelihood of a long trial duration and the lack of support from material witnesses, as per Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
The court's decision was influenced by the lack of support from prosecution witnesses and the nature of allegations in allowing the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
The court may grant bail based on the contention of parity with a co-accused and the lengthy trial process, while also considering the applicant's criminal antecedents and imposing specific condition....
The court may grant bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. considering the period of incarceration, the amount seized from the applicant, and the likelihood of a lengthy trial.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the grounds of parity with the co-accused, the lack of support from prosecution witnesses, the small amount involved in the possession of the applicant....
The court's decision was influenced by the lack of recovery from the applicant, the extended duration of custody, and the fact that bail had been granted to other co-accused in similar cases.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. based on the applicant's plausible involvement in the offence.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the nature of injuries, prolonged custody, and the likelihood of a lengthy trial, as per the provisions of Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure C....
The court considered the similarity of the applicant's case to that of the co-accused who had been granted bail previously and the likelihood of a lengthy trial as grounds for allowing the bail appli....
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
