Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/4291/2024 of MANI@ MUKUND SEHGAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4291 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
MANI@ MUKUND SEHGAL S/O ANIL SEHGAL, AGEDABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT 105,MAHAVAR NAGAR, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI GOVIND PUROHIT - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSEOFFICER THROUGH P.S. ANNAPURNA, DISTRICTINDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
( SMT. VARSHA SINGH THAKUR - GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR STATE; ANDSHRI VIJAY SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR OBJECTOR)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This is the second application filed by the applicant under Section 439 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail relating to CrimeNo.518/2023 registered at Police Station Annapurna, District Indore (M.P.) forthe offence under Sections 294, 323, 307, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860. The applicant is in custody since 19/12/2023.
2. As per prosecution story, on 13/10/2023 complainant Mayank and his two firends Ayush and Hemraj were standing in front of his house, at about09:30 pm applicant and his three friends arrivedat the place of incident. The complainant called his friend Lavish, but due to some misunderstanding therearose a scuffle between the parties and injuries were inflicted to both the partiesincluding the applicant. Accordingly, offence has been registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is aninnocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is incustody since 19/12/2023. His earlier bail application was dismissed aswithdrawn. Victim Mayank did not sustain any bony or fatal injury in theincident, which may be dangerous to life. Investigation is over and charge sheethas been filed. Applicant is student of Class 12[th] and is having examinations.Matter has been amicably settled between the applicant and the victim person.He is permanent resident of Indore district and final conclusion of the trial islikely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer forgrant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Courtdeems fit and proper.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bailapplication and prays for its rejection.
5. Counsel for the objector / victim submits that victim has no objectionif the applicant is enlarged on bail.
6. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.
7. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for theapplicant and also taking note of the fact that investigation is over and chargesheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicantis required; victim did not sustain any bony or fatal injury and he has beendischarged from hospital; he himself pleaded no objection in respect of bail to the present applicant; applicant is a student of 12[th] class and his examination aregoing to take place in near future and final conclusion of the trial will takesufficient long time. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release theapplicant on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, theapplication is allowed.
8. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishingpersonal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five ThousandOnly) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trialCourt for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shallabide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
Tej
(ANIL VERMA)JUDGE