IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA th ON THE 7 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2858 of 2024 BETWEEN:-

KALAMSINGH @ KAMAL S/O KESU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOR, R/O: KALIDEVI, THANA TANDA, DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (MR. JAVED KHAN - ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION RAJGARH, TEHSIL SARDARPUR, DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (MS. VARSHA SINGH THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.177/2023 registered at Police Station Rajgarh (Sardarpur), District Dhar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 394, 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant is in custody since 06.07.2023.

2. As per prosecution story, on 06.04.2023 complainant Sunil Parte lodged an FIR at police station Rajgarh by stating that when he was returning to Rajgarh by his motorcycle after collecting premium amount, near Singodiya Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE Fata two unknown miscreants came on motorcycle and snatched cash of Rs.1.51 lakhs, biomatric device, cheque book, centre register and mobile from him. During investigation, Rs.5,000/- cash has been recovered from possession of co-accused Shankar. Accordingly, offence has been registered.

3 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody since 06.07.2023. Co-accused Suresh @ Suraj and Shankar have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05/10/2023 and 12.10.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.43352/2023 and 44480/2023 in the similar circumstances and other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by the trial Court vide judgment dated 01.02.2024 passed by the A.S.J. Sardarpur in Sessions trial No.58/2023. Investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. No incriminating article has been seized from possession of applicant. Final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that five more criminal antecedents have been found against the present applicant. He is a habitual offender. Hence, he does not deserve for bail.

5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.

6. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant it is revealed that complainant Sunil (PW-4) categorically stated in his deposition that present applicant was not involved with the miscreants, who Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE have committed loot with him and he could not identify him during Test Identification Parade; Co-accused Suresh and Shankar have been enlarged on bail by this Court in similar circumstances and other co-accused persons have also been enlarged on bail by the trial Court. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

7 . It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA)

JUDGE Anushree Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE