Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 12761
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH ON THE 13th OF MARCH, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 10526 of 2024 BETWEEN:- 1. PRITHVIRAJ MEENA S/O SHRI RAM CHANDRA MEENA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGE RAWAN RUNDI, NEEMUCH CITY, DISTRICT NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. LEELADHAR MEENA S/O SHRI RAM CHANDRA MEENA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGE RAWAN RUNDI, NEEMUCH CITY NEMUCH (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, NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS (SHRI SACHIN JAISWAL PL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ADVOCATE GENERAL. This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Rishi Tiwari,Advocate General
Delay in filing an FIR can weaken the prosecution's case and be a factor in granting bail, especially when there is parity with co-accused who have already been granted bail.
Headnote:
BAIL - DELAY IN FILING FIR - PARITY WITH CO-ACCUSED - [Section 439 CrPC]
Fact of the Case:
The applicants were arrested for allegedly causing injuries to the complainant and his brother, leading to the latter's death. The FIR was filed 14 days after the incident, and the applicants had been in custody since their arrest.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the delay in filing the FIR and the fact that the co-accused had already been granted bail. It also considered the applicants' period of custody and the likelihood of a lengthy trial.
Issues: 1. Whether the delay in filing the FIR weakened the prosecution's case.2. Whether the applicants should be granted bail considering the parity with the co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in filing the FIR, coupled with the applicants' period of custody and the parity with the co-accused, justified granting them bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applicants' bail application and directed their release on bail subject to certain conditions.
ORDER
1.Heard and perused the case diary. 2.This is the first bail application filed by the applicants 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 applicants are in detention since 30.11.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this crime. In this case, firstly, allegation against the applicants 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 no Shav Panchnama report is filed with the record. It is further submitted that coaccused Motilal has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.02.2024 passed in MCRC No.7903/2024 and the applicants are having complete parity with him. The applicants are 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 applicants 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 and has also not denied the parity with co-accused Motilal.
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 applicants, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed.
6. It is directed that the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each 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 applicants 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 amit
