HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
VISHAL DHAGAT
Vijay Suryawanshi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRA 3122/2024
SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 - BAIL - [Section 14-A(1)] - Appellant accused of offences under SC/ST Act and IPC - Bail granted considering totality of facts and circumstances, including completion of custodial investigation and allegations against appellant.
Fact of the Case:
Appellant, accused of offences under the SC/ST Act and IPC, including theft, assault, and criminal intimidation, filed an appeal for bail after his bail was rejected by the trial court.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant, considering the totality of facts and circumstances, including the completion of custodial investigation and the allegations against the appellant.
Issues: Whether the appellant should be granted bail in a case involving offences under the SC/ST Act and IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant should be granted bail considering the totality of facts and circumstances, including the completion of custodial investigation and the allegations against the appellant.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant on furnishing a personal bond and surety, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) of the CrPC.
ORDER
. This is first criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against the order of rejection of his bail by the trial Court for grant of regular bail to the appellant who is in jail since 19.02.2024 in connection of Crime No.1/2024, registered at Police Station AJK, District Seoni (M.P) for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323,355, 342, 506, 34, 386, 120-B, 347, 348, 327, 365, 354-A of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r-s), 3(2)(v- A), 3(2)(v), 3(1)(w)(2) of SC/ST Act.
2 . Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that complainant was his servant and was working in a grocery shop. He committed theft in the shop, however no action was taken against him as he was working in the shop since last 10 to 12 years. It is submitted that later on complainant has lodged a report under SC/ST Act. It is submitted that appellant is a political person and cases pending against him has arisen out of political protest and action which are taken by appellant for public good. It is submitted that appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. In these circumstances, appellant may be released on bail.
3. Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State Government as well as learned counsel for the objector opposed the appeal for grant of bail. It is submitted that offences are serious in nature. In these circumstances appellant may not be enlarged on bail.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Custodial investigation of appellant is over. Police no longer require appellant for custodial investigation.
6. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account allegations made against the appellant, appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.
7. It is directed that appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
8. In addition to that appellant shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. as under:- (a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter;
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.