IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vivek Rusia, J.
Jagdish – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 59216 of 2022
Decided On : 01-02-2023
Bail Application - Forgery Allegation - The court allowed the bail application considering the period of custody and directed the applicant to be released on bail with certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with a case involving allegations of preparing forged documents with the intention to commit cheating.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, considering the period of custody and without commenting on the merit of the case. The applicant was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail despite being an accused in multiple criminal cases.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the period of custody, completion of investigation, and the filing of the charge sheet. It also took into account the absence of the need for further custodial interrogation.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions, including furnishing a personal bond and surety, marking his presence at the concerned Police Station, and refraining from furnishing surety in any other criminal case during the pendency of the current cases.
JUDGMENT
Vivek Rusia, J. - This is second application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the applicant who is in custody since 25.04.2022 in connection with Crime No.08/2022, registered at Police Station Crime Branch Indore for the offence punishable under Sections 419,420,467 and 468 of IPC
2. As per prosecution story, the allegation against the applicant is that he with an intention to commit cheating prepared forged rin pustika and presented the same at the time of furnishing bail bonds and surety of co-accused persons.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been made accused on the basis of the memorandum under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act of co-accused Prakash, who was found with forged rin pustika. This applicant was not found in the Court. He is owner of the land for which the rin pustika was recovered from his possession and another case was registered against him at crime no.450/2019 in which he has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.01.2022 in M.Cr.C.No.45187/2021. He remained in custody for almost one year in that case and in this case he has completed nine months custody. Investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed and no further custodial interrogation is required. All the documents have been seized.
4. Per contra learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that he is an habitual offender and there are 12 criminal cases of IPC and Gambling Act registered against the applicant.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during the trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during the trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
6. The applicant is directed to mark his presence in the concerned Police Station at 11.30 am on every Monday till conclusion of the trial. He is also directed not to furnish surety in any of the criminal case during the pendency of these two crimes.
Certified copy, as per rules.
AI
The court considered the period of custody, completion of investigation, and the absence of the need for further custodial interrogation in granting bail to the applicant.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the nature and gravity of the offence, along with considering the facts & circumstances of the case.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the prosecutrix's statement supporting the applicant and her disclosure of her age as 20-21 years, despite the State's opposition based on the age reco....
Bail can be granted in serious offenses if the accused has been in custody for an extended period and adheres to specific conditions.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the nature and gravity of the alleged offence, the arguments presented, and the willingness of the applicant to abide by specified conditions.
Bail should not be withheld as a pre-trial punishment – Criminal Court, exercising jurisdiction to grant of bail or anticipatory bail is not expected to act as a recovery agent to realize dues of com....
Grant of bail based on lack of conclusive evidence and the period of custody.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must consider the nature of allegations and personal liberty when deciding bail applications.
The court may grant bail based on factors such as the status of co-accused and the expected duration of the trial, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case.
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.