IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Anil Verma, J.
Sandeep – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 599 of 2023
Decided On : 09-01-2023
Bail Application - Offence under IPC - The court granted bail to the applicant based on lack of corroboration of the injury attributed to the applicant and the fact that he was not the main accused in the case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for an offence under sections 307, 326, 323, 324, 294, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 read with Section 25 of Arms Act. The applicant was accused of causing injury to the victim during an altercation.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the nature and gravity of the offence, the fact that the applicant was not the main accused, and the lack of corroboration of the injury attributed to the applicant. The court also noted that the applicant had been acquitted in a previous case and that the investigation was over and charge-sheet had been filed. Therefore, the court granted bail to the applicant.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the allegations against him and the opposition from the State.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to grant bail based on the lack of corroboration of the injury attributed to the applicant, the fact that he was not the main accused, and the completion of the investigation with the filing of the charge-sheet.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
JUDGMENT
Anil Verma, J. - This is the first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 12.12.2022 in connection with Crime No.538/2022 registered at Police Station-Manpur, District Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under sections 307, 326, 323, 324, 294, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 read with Section 25 of Arms Act.
2. As per prosecution story, on 07.11.2022 at about 06:30 PM, informant Jitendra Lodged an FIR by stating that he alongwith his brother Govind went to milk Dairy of accused Arun and Sandeep. On the previous land dispute, both have abused to Govind, at that time, co-accused Sachin, Devendra and Mahipal came there and assaulted to Govind, Sachin has gave sword blow on his left leg, Devendra has inflicted knife injury on his head, Arun caused injury on his left hand, accused Sandeep has inflicted lathi blow on his back and hand. They have caused multiple injuries to Govind. Accordingly, offence has been registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody since 12.12.2022. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Allegation attributed against present applicant is only that he caused injury to Govind by means of lathi, but same injury was not corroborated by the medical evidence. Cross FIR has also been lodged against the complainant party bearing Crime No.569/2022 under Sections 294, 323, 324, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. Applicant is permanent resident of Indore district. Hence, he prays that applicant be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that cross FIR has been lodged after 12 days of incident and name of the present applicant mentioned in the FIR. One criminal antecedent has been found against the present applicant. Hence, he does not deserve for bail
5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and also taking note of the fact that present applicant is not the main accused, allegation levelled against the present applicant is only that at the time of incident he was carrying a lathi and has caused injuries to Govind; although one offence was earlier registered against the present applicant, in that case, he has been acquitted by the trail Court, investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.
6. Therefore, the application is allowed. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/-(Rupees 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 all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
The lack of corroboration of the injury attributed to the applicant and the completion of the investigation with the filing of the charge-sheet influenced the court's decision to grant bail.
The court may grant bail based on the nature and gravity of the offence, completion of investigation, filing of charge-sheet, and the likelihood of a long trial duration.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the nature and gravity of the offense, the absence of bone injury sustained by the victim, the existence of a cross case against the complainant party,....
The importance of legal evidence and the absence of a Test Identification Parade in implicating an individual in a criminal offence.
The court may grant bail based on the nature and gravity of the allegations, the period of detention, and the bail granted to co-accused in similar circumstances.
Grant of bail based on lack of evidence, nature of offence, and parity with co-accused
Bail applications should not be decided on the merits of the case, and the evidence adduced in trial should be weighed by the trial court.
Bail applications should not be determined based on the merits of the case, and the trial court is tasked with evaluating evidence presented during the trial.
The court may grant bail based on the lack of criminal antecedent, the period of custody, and the ground of parity with co-accused, considering the possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial....
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.