JUDGMENT

Pranay Verma, J. - They are heard. Perused the case diary /challan papers.

2. This is the first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as the applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.425/2022, registered at Police Station Barwani, District Barwani (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC.

3. The applicant is in custody since 19.07.2022.

4. As per the prosecution, Kavita daughter of co-accused Kailash Damke had married Lakhan without his consent. On that count Kailash was quite angry with him and on 11.06.2022 at about 3.30 p.m. came to his house and argued with him and abused him. Thereafter at 9.00 p.m. in front of Panwadi Mohalla, Manglik Bhawan Kailash, Lakki, Lokesh and the other co-accused including the present applicant beat Aditya and Sunil with an intention to kill them. Kailash assaulted Aditya with a knife on his head and back. Lucky assaulted Lakhan with knife and Lokesh assaulted Lakhan and Aditya with a danda (stick) on his head resulting in grievous injuries to him. All the other co-accused also beat the complainant with hands and fists and also on various parts of the body. As a result of injuries inflicted upon him Aditya died and Lakhan suffered grievous injuries. On the report lodged by the complainant, investigation was commenced and statements of witnesses were recorded, on the basis of which applicant has been implicated and arrested for the present offence.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no allegation against the applicant of assaulting the deceased or injured with any weapon. He is only alleged to have been present along with the other accused but no witness has stated anything as regards his acts. He is not stated to have been possessed with any deadly weapon. He has not been named in the FIR nor has any recovery of any weapon been made from him. The allegations against him are omnibus in nature. Even in the statements of witnesses recorded on 26.06.2022 he has not been named. Investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.

6. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the allegation levelled against the applicant and the material collected by the prosecution against him, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case- diary.

8. The allegation against the applicant is only of having been present along with the co-accused in a premeditated manner but no specific act has been attributed to him by any of the witnesses. There is no allegation against him of assaulting any one with any weapon or being armed with any weapon. No recovery of any weapon has been made from him. The allegations against him are omnibus in nature. He is aged about 27 years. Investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and further custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary. Thus,in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

9. Accordingly, without commenting on merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance as and when directed.

10. It is also directed that the applicant will abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.