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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 17967

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Pritamsingh Khangar – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 9793/2023



Advocates:
Brij Kishore Jain,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR st ON THE 1 OF MARCH, 2023 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9793 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

PRITAMSINGH KHANGAR S/O BHAIYALAL KHANGAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR PREM NAGAR NEAR SHIVAJI SCHOOL, BIRLAGRAM NAGDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (BY SHRI SAHITYA CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE )

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION MAHIDPUR ROAD DISTT. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY SHRI BHUWAN DESHMUKH, G.A. )

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

ORDER

They are heard. Perused the case diary / challan papers.

This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. as he is implicated in connection with Crime No.0230/2022 registered at Police Station Mahidpur Road, District Ujjain (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in custody since

19.12.2022.

The allegation against the applicant is that he was also involved in the aforesaid case, wherein 10 kg of cannabis (Ganja) has been recovered from the Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ possession of co-accused Kuldeep and Arjun, the commercial quantity of which is 20 kg.

Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has arraigned as an accused on the basis of a memo prepared under Section 27of the Evidence Act as the person who has supplied the aforesaid contraband. It is further submitted that apart from the aforesaid memo, there is nothing on record to connect the applicant with the offence.

Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that there is telephonic record of conversation between the applicant and co-accused Kuldeep and thus, no case for grant of bail is made out. However, it is not denied that no contraband has been seized from the possession of applicant and there are no criminal antecedent against him.

On due consideration of submissions, perusal of the case-diary and considering the fact that the contraband is not commercial in nature and the applicant is lodged in jail since 19.12.2022, charge-sheet has already been filed, this Court finds it expedient to allow the bail application. Accordingly, without reflecting anything on the merits of the case, the application filed under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant is hereby allowed.

The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ Certified copy, as per rules.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)

JUDGE Pankaj Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ

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