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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 2546

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL

ON THE 20th OF FEBRUARY, 2023

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5789 of 2023

BETWEEN:-

AKHTAR HASNEN S/O SHRI SARDAR ALI, AGED ABOUT

85 YEARS, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA HAJIPUR SIRONJ,

DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT

(SHRI GAURAV MISHRA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT)

AND

THE STATE OF MADHY

A PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE

STATION

THROUGH

POLICE

STATION

SIRONJ,

DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT

( SHRI PRAMOD PACHAURI- LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE

RESPONDENT- STATE)

This application coming on for HEARING this day, the court passed

the following:

Advocates:
Jai Prakash Mishra,Advocate General

ORDER

This FIRST application under Section 439 of CrPC has been filed on behalf of applicant Akhtar Hasnen for grant of bail, who has been arrested on 23-01-2023 in connection with Crime No.558 of 2022 registered at Police Station Sironj, District Vidisha for offence under Sections 294, 323, 324, 506, 34 of IPC and enhanced Sections 325, 326 of IPC.

According to prosecution case, on 26-12-2022, at around 04:55 pm, complainant Sazid Hasnen lodged an FIR vide Crime No.558 of 2022 at police station Sironj, District Vidisha against present applicant and other co-accused alleging therein that his land is adjacent to the land of present applicant of Hajipur. At around 1:30 pm, he was in his village Madagan and outside of house, accused Salman along with his brothers erected Jaretha on the way by which they are facing inconveniences and requested accused persons for removal of Jaretha. On account of this, accused persons started abusing in filthy languages. When he objected to it, accused Salman told that they will not remove Jaretha and thereafter, accused Salman armed with farsa, Athar alias Tipu, Juned and Naved armed with lathi came there and committed marpeet as a result of which, he sustained injuries on his head and blood started oozing.

When his brother Abid and father Mushahid Ali came there for intervening, they were also sustained injuries caused by accused persons. The incident was witnessed by his aunt Arifa and his mother Afroj. Thereafter, all injured were sent to Sironj Hospital for medical examination. On his report, Crime No.558 of 2022 was registered. As per MLC of Abid, he sustained three incised wound, one abrasion and one bruise and as per X-ray, fracture of base of 1st distal phalanx was found. As per MLC of Sazid, one lacerated would was found on the scalp and as per CT scan report, depressed fracture of parietal bone on right side was found. As MLC of Mushahid, one incised wound over occipital region of scalp, swelling on right side of food and bruise over left side of thigh was found and as per X-ray, fracture of metatarsal bone of left foot was found.

Thereafter, Section 325, 326 of IPC was enhanced. After completion of investigation and other formalities, charge sheet has been filed.

On behalf of accused, a cross-case bearing Crime No.559 of 2022 has been registered at same police station regarding the same incident against the complainant party by accused party on 26-12-2022 at around 06:45 pm for offences punishable under Section 294, 323, 324, 506, 34 of IPC. In the incident, Azhar, Salman and Naved and Athar alias Teepu have also sustained injuries. After completion of investigation and other formalities, charge sheet has been filed against complainant party.

It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been implicated in the case only on the basis of omnibus allegations. He has not caused any injury to any of the injured. The applicant is 85-year old person. He is in custody since 23-01-2023. Charge sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take some time. There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and prayed for dismissal of the application.

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary as well as charge sheet.

Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of this case but without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application should be allowed and by allowing the application it is ordered that if the applicant furnishes a cash surety of Rs.15,000/- along with a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) along with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, he should be released on bail. He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date. In case of default of depositing the

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