Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(MP) 1589

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Anil Verma, J.
Kripalsingh – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh Station – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.5580 of 2022
Decided On : 08-02-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Nilesh Manore, Advocate, Harshalata Soni, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

The court considered the nature of the allegation, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial in granting bail to the applicant.

Headnote:
Arms Act - Bail Application - The court granted bail to the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the nature of the allegation, the fact that co-accused individuals had already been granted bail, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial.
Fact of the Case:

The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as he was in jail since 30/01/2021 in connection with an offense under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution story involved the recovery of arms from the accused persons based on secret information received by the police.
Finding of the Court:

The court, after considering the arguments of both parties, the nature of the allegation, the fact that co-accused individuals had already been granted bail, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial, deemed it proper to release the accused/applicant on bail without commenting on the merits of the case.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the nature of the allegation, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court granted bail to the applicant based on the nature of the allegation, the fact that co-accused individuals had already been granted bail, the length of time the applicant had been in custody, and the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial.
Final Decision: The application for bail was allowed, and the applicant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the condition to abide by the enumerated conditions under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

anil Verma, J. - applicant has filed this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is in Jail since 30/01/2021 in connection with Crime No. 30/2021 registered at P.S Balakwada Distt. Khargone (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 25/27 of arms act.

As per prosecution story, on 13.01.2020, police has received secret information regarding some unknown persons having arms. acting upon the said information, police reached the spot, intercepted motorcycles bearing registration numbers MP 46 MK 0131 and MP 10 ND 1280 and searched the accused persons and recovered seven country made pistols and two live rounds from Gurupreet Singh, two pistols from Kripal Singh (present applicant) two pistols from Ritu alias Ritendra Singh and four pistols from bag in the hands of Jagdish alias Jaggu. accordingly offence has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. No further custodial investigation is required. There is no prima facie evidence against him. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, but final conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. applicant is in custody since 30/01/2021. He is a permanent resident of District Khargone. Co-caused Sunil has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25/10/2021 passed in MCRC no. 386462021 and co-accused Ritu has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 13.1.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 58402/21, therefore, on the ground of parity, present applicant deserves for grant of bail.

Per-contra, learned PL for respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case dairy.

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature of allegation and also taking note of the fact that co-accused Sunil and Ritu have already been enlarged on bail in similar circumstances; applicant is in custody since 30/01/2021; investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no custodial interrogation is required; and possibility of delay in conclusion of the trial cannot be ruled out, I deem it proper to release the accused / applicant on bail.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Before releasing the applicant from the custody, the Jail authorities are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of Covid-19 infections and shall comply with the directions issued by the Hon;ble apex Court in W.P.No. 01/2020. Certified copy as per Rules.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document