SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 29068

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV, J
Manoj – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 8362/2024



Advocates:
Ravi Dwivedi,Advocate General

The court granted bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. considering the applicant's circumstances and the absence of likelihood of absconding, subject to compliance with specific conditions.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail application - Second application for bail filed after the applicant's absence during trial - First bail granted on 20/06/2012, but applicant remained absent on 25/07/2022 due to custody in another case - Applicant claims innocence and readiness to deposit Rs. 5,000/- as a show of good faith - Trial likely to take time, and no likelihood of absconding if released. (Paras 1, 2, 3)

(B) Bail - Conditions for grant - Court allows bail subject to conditions including compliance with bond terms, cooperation in trial, and prohibition against committing further offences. (Paras 4, 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, previously granted bail, was absent during trial due to being in custody for another case. He is the sole breadwinner for his family and has been in custody since 24/11/2023.

Findings of Court:
The application for bail is allowed with conditions, including forfeiture of Rs. 5,000/- from the previous bond and requirement of a fresh bond of Rs. 50,000/-.

Issues: The main issues addressed were the applicant's absence during trial and the justification for granting bail despite previous non-appearance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for compliance with bond conditions and cooperation in the trial, while also considering the applicant's circumstances and the likelihood of absconding.

Result: Bail granted subject to conditions.

ORDER

This is Second application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to FIR No. 594 of 2011 registered at Police Station Ambah, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 395, 397 of IPC and section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act. First bail application was allowed by this Court vide order dated 20/06/2012 passed in M.Cr.C.No. 2648/2012. This is a case of bail jump.

Earlier the applicant was granted bail on 20/06/2012, however, during the course of trial, he remained absent before the trial court on a fixed date i.e. on 25/07/2022 and thereafter, he was produced before the trial court on 24/11/2023 through production warrant and since then he is in jail.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that absence of the applicant before the trial court is bonafide as he was under custody in some other criminal case, therefore, he could not appear before the trial court on the fixed date. He further argued that applicant is the only earning member of his family. The applicant is in custody since 24/11/2023 i.e. for almost four months. The applicant is permanent resident of District Gwalior. To show his bonafide, the applicant is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000/- before the trial court from his previous bond. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time and there is no likelihood of his absconsion, if released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its dismissal.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) b e forfeited from previous personal bond of the applicant and on furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two local solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he should be released on bail.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-

1) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

    ) The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4 ) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future. In case, if he/she is found involving in the offence of the same nature, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.

5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6 ) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top