Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/54346/2023 of SATISH SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2023
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKARON THE 29[th] OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 54346 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SATISH SINGH S/O SHRI NATTHI BAGHEL, AGEDABOUT 20 YEARS, OCCUPATION: KRASHI GRAMBHONPURA THANA ENDORI DISTRICT BHIND MP(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI L.S. TOMAR - ADVOCATE )
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICESTATION THROUGH POLICE THANA SIHONIA DISTRICTMORENA MP (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI SUSHANT TIWARI - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)(COMPLAINANT BY SHRI RAJESH GOSWAMI - ADVOCATE)
.....RESPONDENT
This application coming on for admission hearing this day, the courtpassed 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
They are heard. Perused the case-diary.
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as he is implicated in connection with CrimeNo. 183/2022 registered at Police Station Shihoniya, District Morena (MP) foroffence punishable under Sections 307, 34 of IPC. Applicant is in jail since19/11/2023.
The allegation against the applicant, in short, is that he alongwith co-accused persons fired gun shot on the complainant, due to which, he sustained injuries.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that date of incident is statedto be 23/08/2022 at 9.00 Am, but in the FIR, the name of the applicant does notfind place. It is further submitted that name of the applicant came for the firsttime on record on 06/11/2023. It is further submitted that in the FIR, it has beenmentioned that two unknown persons who covered their face by clothes firedgun shot at the complainant, but the complainant could not identify the applicantand he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has nocriminal antecedents and he is lodged in jail since 19.11.2023 and finalconclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time, therefore, it is prayedthat the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail.
Counsel for the respondent/State as well as counsel for the complainant,on the other hand have opposed the application and prays for its rejection.
However, on a query made by this Court, it is submitted by the Statecounsel that no recovery has been effected from the applicant.
Having considered the rival submissions, perusal of the case diary as wellas controversy involved in the present case and the fact that name of theapplicant does not find place in the FIR and the applicant is lodged in jail since19.11.2023 and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient longtime, without reflecting anything on the merits of the case, the application filedunder 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 apersonal 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 forhis regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abideby the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code,1973.
Certified copy as per rules.
Durgekar
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)JUDGE