Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(MP) 1646

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Sintu – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.7366 of 2022
Decided On : 10-02-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Omprakash Solanki, Advocate, Viraj Godha, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of seizure from the applicant and the completion of the investigation influenced the court's decision to grant bail without expressing any view on the merits of the case.

Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the applicant, considering that no seizure was made from the applicant and the investigation had been completed, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Fact of the Case:

The applicant filed for bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. as he was in jail in connection with a case for the offence punishable under Sections 356, 379, and 392 of IPC. The applicant's counsel argued that nothing was recovered from the possession of the applicant, and the snatched chain was recovered from a co-accused. The panel lawyer opposed the application, stating that the applicant was part of the group involved in chain snatching.
Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the application for bail, considering that no seizure was made from the applicant and the investigation had been completed. The court directed the release of the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, with instructions for compliance with COVID-19 protocols. It was also made clear that the bail order would stand cancelled automatically if the applicant was found involved in any other case during the trial.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant was entitled to bail despite being part of the group involved in chain snatching, as no seizure was made from the applicant and the investigation had been completed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of seizure from the applicant and the completion of the investigation, leading to the conclusion that the applicant was entitled to bail without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, with instructions for compliance with COVID-19 protocols, and made it clear that the bail order would stand cancelled automatically if the applicant was found involved in any other case during the trial.

JUDGMENT

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J. - This is first application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicant who is in jail since 13.11.2021 in connection with Crime No.1414/2021 registered at Police Station Lasudiya, Indore for the offence punishable under Sections 356, 379 and 392 of IPC.

Learned counsel for applicant submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of applicant. It is stated that snatched chain has been recovered from the possession of co-accused Krishna. It is further submitted that applicant is in jail since 13.11.2021. Investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed. In these circumstances the applicant be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the application by submitting that as p er memorandum under section 27 of Evidence act, it is admitted that applicant was part of the group of persons who were involved in chain snatching.

However, taking into consideration that there was no seizure from the applicant and investigation has already been completed, I am of the opinion that applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that applicant- Sintu shall be released from custody upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Court below.

The prison authorities are also requested to ensure compliance with the order passed by the Supreme Court IN RE : CONTaGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS in SUO MOTU "W.P. (C) No.1/2020" and ensure that the applicant is examined by the jail doctor before his release. If the applicant shows symptoms of COVID-19, the doctor shall forthwith direct him to be produced before the appropriate hospital designated for the detection and treatment of COVID-19 patients. If the doctor is of the opinion that the applicant is not affected with the virus, the jail authorities shall ensure his transportation from the jail till his place of residence.

It is further made clear that if it is found that the applicant is involved in any other case during the trial, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without reference to the Court and the Police will be at liberty to arrest the applicant.

A typed copy of this order is being forwarded to the Office of the advocate General, on their email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned. The office is requested to forward a copy of this order to the court below.

C.c. as per rules.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document