IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Subodh Abhyankar, J.
Mohammad Javed @ Javed Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.8886 of 2022
Decided On : 18-02-2022
Bail Application - Sale of Plot - The court allowed the bail application of the applicant who was implicated in a case related to the sale of a plot, considering the settlement of dispute between the parties and the likelihood of a long trial.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was in custody for offences related to the sale of a plot. The applicant and the complainant had settled their dispute and filed for compounding of the offence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found force with the contention raised by the counsel for the applicant, considering the likelihood of a long trial and the settlement of the dispute between the parties.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court allowed the bail application based on the settlement of the dispute and the likelihood of a long trial.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was directed to be released on bail with specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Subodh abhyankar, J. - This is the applicant's first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is implicated in connection with Crime No.943/2021 registered at Police Station - Chandan Nagar, District - Indore for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant is in custody since 28.01.2022.
The allegation against the present applicant is that after obtaining the consideration to sale the plot, the plot was not sold to the complainant.
Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the plot was sold by the applicant on the basis of agreement in anticipation of the earlier document with the original owner of the property. However, as the sale could not be materialized, subsequent sale deed entered into between the applicant and the complainant and went into jeopardy. He has further submitted that they have settled their dispute and also filed an application under Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C. for compounding of the offence, copy of which is also placed on record. The applicant is in jail since 28.01.2022. The final conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Hence, the applicant may enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that he has no objection if applicant is granted bail. It is submitted that parties have settled the dispute.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent / State opposes the bail application. However, she did not dispute that the parties have settled their dispute.
On due consideration of the rival submissions, perusal of the case diary and considering the fact that the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time, this Court finds force with the contention raised by the counsel for the applicant.
accordingly, the present application for grant of bail is hereby allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance as and when directed. The applicant shall be abide by the conditions as enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
It is made clear that, after being released on bail, if the applicant again indulges in any criminal activity, the present bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference to the Court and the police shall be entitled 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.
The court considered the settlement of the dispute and the likelihood of a long trial in allowing the bail application.
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....
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 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 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 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'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 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 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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.