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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 35237

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH ON THE 29th OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7903 of 2024 BETWEEN:- MOTILAL MEENA S/O SHRI RAM CHANDRA MEENA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOR R/O VILLAGE RAWAN RUNDI NEEMUCH CITY DISTT. NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH) .....APPLICANT (SHRI RISHI TIWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER ). AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION NEEMUCH CITY DIST. NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS ( SHRI SAMEER VERMA PL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE GENERAL20. This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

Advocates:
Rishi Tiwari,Advocate General

ORDER

1.Heard and perused the case diary. 2.This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.656/2023, registered at P.S.- Neemuch City, District-Neemuch (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 302, 323, 294,506,190,34 of IPC. The applicant is in detention since 30.11.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this crime. In this case, firstly, allegation against the applicant came in the statement of complainant Ramchandra on 30.11.2023 which is 14 days later from the date of incident dated 16.11.2023. As per the allegation of the complainant made in the statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC, the applicant and his two brothers have caused injury to him and his brother(deceased) by using kicks and fists, thereafter, the deceased has epxired on 16.11.2023. Now, the question arises as to why the complainant has not made report just after the incident. The reasons assigned by the prosecution in this regard, are not satisfactory. There is n o Shav Panchnama report is filed with the record. The applicant is in custody since 30.11.2023. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time, therefore, it is prayed that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and prayed for its dismissal but has fairly submitted that the statement of the complainant was recorded after 14 days on the same day on which the complaint was registered.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and delay in filing of the FIR, custody period of the applicant, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed.

6. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his/her furnishing a 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, to appear before the trial Court on the dates given by the Court. The applicant shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

7. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective. Certified copy as per rules.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE VD (PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE VD

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top