Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/4376/2024 of VIKAS @DAU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4376 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
VIKAS @DAU S/O GOVIND PIPALDE, AGED ABOUT 23YEAR S , OCCUPATION: LABOUR, R/O: 303, NAYABASERA, CHHOTI KHAJARANI, INDORE (MADHYAPRADESH)
(MR. SANDEEP SETHIYA - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSEOFFICER THROUGH M.I.G. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(MR. OSHIN UPADHYAY - ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT ANDMS. NISHA TANWAR - PANEL LAWYER)
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
Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant for grant ofregular bail relating to Crime No.236/2023 registered at P.S. M.I.G., DistrictIndore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 506and 307/34 of IPC. He is in jail since 13.04.2023.
2. His earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn by this Courtvide order dated 11.10.2023 passed in MCRC No.39656/2023.
3. As per the prosecution story, on 26.03.2023, complainant lodged a report at P.S. M.I.G., District Indore by stating that on 25.03.2023 during thefestival of Gangour there was much crowd. He parked his motorcycle at NayaBasera. In the night, at about 10:30 PM, when he went to bring his motorcycleback, four persons were also present there and they started abusing him in filthylanguage over previous dispute. When complainant was going back to hishome, then co-accused Sooraj caught hold him from back side and presentapplicant Vikas caused injury by means of knife to the complainant. After that,people were gathered there, then accused persons ran way from the spot.Accordingly, a case has been registered.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocentperson and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. Applicant is in jail since13.04.2023. Co-accused Sooraj has been enlarged on bail by this Court videorder dated 20.06.2023 passed in MCRC No.25550/2023 in the similarcircumstances. Now, matter has been amicably settled between the parties andcomplainant has no objection regarding the bail to the present applicant.Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. He is a permanent residentof District Indore. Final conclusion of trial will take considerable long time.Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.
5 . Per-contra, learned counsel for respondent/State opposes the bailapplication and prays for its rejection by submitting that as many as 14 criminalantecedents have been found against the present applicant. He is a habitualoffender. Hence, he does not deserve for bail.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that matter has beenamicably settled between the parties and he has no objection if bail is granted tothe present applicant.
7. Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below.
8. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, argumentsadvanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as alsotaking note of the fact that applicant has already suffered jail incarceration forlast nine months; victim did not sustain any bony or fatal injury; co-accused hasalso been enlarged on bail by this Court in the similar circumstances;investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, no furthercustodial interrogation of applicant is required and final conclusion of trial willtake considerable long time. In view of the above, without commenting on themerits of the case, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.
9. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicantbe released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum ofRs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent suretyin the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance beforethe trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by the conditionsenumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
Anushree
(ANIL VERMA)JUDGE