Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/48479/2018 of JITENDRA @ BHURA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-48479-2018 (JITENDRA @ BHOORA Vs THE STATE OF
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHMCRC-48479-2018
(JITENDRA @ BHOORA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 31/12/2018
Shri R.K. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Abhishek Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for therespondent-State.
With consent heard finally.
The applicant has filed this first application u/S. 439, Cr.P.C. forgrant of bail. The applicant has been arrested by Police StationSabalgarh, District Morena in connection with Crime No.333/2018registered in relation to the offence punishable u/Ss. 363, 366, 376(2)(G) and 343 of IPC.
It is submitted by learned counsel on behalf of the applicant thatthe case bears such improbable ingredients in the FIR itself that itappears that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. Conductof the prosecutrix indicates that she was a consenting party throughoutas the co-accused/Pawan @ Golu Dhakad took her to the extent ofKerala and she did not whistle any alarm over her position, therefore,such improbable story cannot be relied upon. It is further submittedthat another co-accused Rambhajan, as alleged in the FIR, on enquiryfound to be falsely implicated therefore, Investigating Authority has notfiled charge-sheet against the said accomplice. The whole story isshaken and later on improved in statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.,of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for applicant placed the order dated13.11.2018 passed in M.Cr.C No. 44453/2018 (Pawan @ Golu Dhakad Vs. State of M.P.) and seeks parity vis a vis that order.Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation as well as in thetrial. He prayed for grant of bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State opposed theprayer and prayed for dismissal of the application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
LJ*
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHMCRC-48479-2018
(JITENDRA @ BHOORA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Considering the submissions advanced by the counsel for theapplicant and on perusal of the case diary, without expressing anyopinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate toallow this application in the following terms.
It is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac Only)with two solvent sureties each of 50,000/- of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
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.
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of thebond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the casemay be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement,threat or promise to any person acquitted with the facts of the case soas to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to thePolice Officer, as the case may be and would not move in the vicinity ofthe complainant;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during thetrial;
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission ofthe trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and
7. The applicant shall appear before Police Station concerned onevery Monday between 10 AM to 02 PM and he would further makehimself available for investigation and interrogation as and whenrequired, till filing of the charge-sheet.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Anand Pathak)
V. JUDGE