Madhya Pradesh High Court

MCRC/52055/2018 of SAURAV SINGH CHAUHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018

Cites 0, Cited by 0

MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 52055/2018 Saurav Singh Chauhan vs. State of

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C. No. 52055/2018Saurav Singh Chauhan vs. State of M.P.

M.Cr.C. No. 52055/2018

Gwalior date 31/12/2018

Shri Rajiv Sharma, counsel for the applicant.Shri B.M. Patel, learned Public Prosecutor for therespondent/State.

Heard on I.A. No. 9853/18, an application foramendment in the memo of bail application.

For the reasons stated in the application, I.A. No.9853/18 is allowed.

Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted tocarry out necessary amendment in the memo of bailapplication during course of the day.

Case diary is available.

This is the Second application under Section 439 ofthe Cr.P.C for grant of bail. The first bail application wasdismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 22/10/2018passed in M.Cr.C. No. 38081/2018.

The applicant has been arrested on 28.08.2018 inconnection with Crime No. 67/2018 registered at PoliceStation Mihona District Bhind for the offences punishableunder Sections 392 & 341 of IPC and Section 11/13 ofMPDVPK Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicantthat although the bail applications of the co-accusedpersons have been rejected, but their case isdistinguishable as they were identified by thecomplainant in the Test Identification Parade but so faras the case of present applicant is concerned, he wasnot even put for Test Identification Parade. The co-accused Pintu Singh has already been released on bailby this Court vide order dated 22/11/2018 passed in HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHM.Cr.C. No. 52055/2018Saurav Singh Chauhan vs. State of M.P.

M.Cr.C. No. 44602/2018. The trial is likely to takesufficiently long time and there is no possibility of hisabsconding or tampering with the prosecution case.

Per contra, the application is opposed by the Statecounsel. It is submitted that one Mangalsutra withPendal which was looted from the complainant has beenrecovered from the possession of the applicant whichhas been duly identified by the complainant. It is furthersubmitted that the applicant has a criminal history.

Considering the period of detention, facts andcircumstances of the case and without commenting onmerits of the case, the application is allowed. It isdirected that the applicant be released on bail onfurnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/-(Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with one surety in thelike amount to the satisfaction of the TrialCourt/Committal Court to appear before the Court onthe dates given by the concerned Court.

This order shall be effective till the end of trial butin case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S.Ahluwalia)

Vacation Judge

Durgekar*

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead