IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL th ON THE 10 OF JULY, 2023 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 29034 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

SAGAR S/O SAHEBRAO BHUJADE, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O SADAR BETUL DISTT. BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (BY SHRI ABHIJEET AWASTHI - ADVOCATE )

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION BETUL BAZAR DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY SHRI N. S. SOLANKI - PANEL LAWYER )

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

ORDER

This is the fifth bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to FIR No. 156/2022 dated 19.4.2022, registered at Police Station-Betul Bazar District Betul (M.P.) for the offence under Section 307/34 of IPC and Section 25/ 27 of Arms Act. He is in detention since 23.04.2022.

2. As per prosecution story, on 19.7.2022 a complaint was lodged by the complainant alleging that he was surrounded by co-accused persons namely Vishal Jaiswal, Sujeet and Nilesh with whom the complainant had previous enmity and one of the accused person attacked the complainant with pistol and Signature Not Verified fled away from the spot. FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated. He has drawn Court's attention towards evidence of the injured witness Ashok Kawde (P.W.5) and submitted that injured in para 11 of cross examination has stated that shot was fired towards him but it was not fired on him. Some altercation had taken place between him and sarpanch. He had sustained gun shot injury mistakenly. He has also referred to para 12 of the cross examination in which injured stated that gun shot was fired with an intention to kill him. On the basis of aforesaid pretext, he has prayed that applicant be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant o f bail to the applicant on the ground that applicant's earlier bail applications have been dismissed on merits. This Court is not required to appreciate the evidence. It is for the trial Court to appreciate the probative value of the evidence of witnesses. Therefore, he has prayed for rejection of the bail application.

5. Applicant's third bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 11.11.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No.51688/2022.

6. Even if for the sake of argument, the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant is considered, even then it cannot be looked over that in his examination in chief injured has specifically stated that Sagar had fired gun shot on him and he had sustained gun shot injury. As far as contradictions and omissions in the evidence of witnesses are concerned, High Court is not required to appreciate the veracity of evidence of witnesses. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhatisgarh has held that "at Signature Not Verified the stage of granting of bail, the Court can only go into the question of the prima facie case established for granting bail. It cannot go into the question of credibility and reliability of the witnesses put up by the prosecution. The question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses can only be tested during the trial."

7. Therefore, having taken into consideration all the facts and consideration of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, this fifth bail application too under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

filed on behalf of applicant- Sagar is dismissed (DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)

JUDGE mrs. mishra Signature Not Verified