Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/2480/2024 of SACHIN 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 INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGHON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2480 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SACHIN S/O SHRI BHANVARRAO BHODVEN,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOB R/O. B-3-2211, NANO CITY, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
(MS. SONALI RAJORIA - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION LASUDIA, INDORE (MADHYAPRADESH)
(SHRI SURENDRA GUPTA - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
.....RESPONDENTS
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
Heard and perused the case diary.
This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail in relation toFIR/Crime No.1071/2023, registered at Police Station-Lasudiya, District Indore,for the offence under Sections 8/21, of the Narcotic Drugs and PsychotropicSubstances Act 1985. Applicant is in jail since 25.07.2023.
2. As per prosecution story, 12 grams of Brown Sugarhas been recovered from the possession of applicant.
3 . It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that theapplicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Noncommercial quantity of 12 grams of Brown Sugar has been recovered from thepresent applicant. There are no criminal antecedents against the applicant. Theapplicant is in custody since 25.07.2023 (more than 6 months in custody) andfinal conclusion of trial will take considerable long time. Hence, the applicantmay be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application and praysfo r its rejection, however, it is fairly submitted that there are no criminalantecedents against the applicant.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the factsand circumstances of the case, I am of the view that it is a case in whichapplicant may be released on bail. Consequently, without commenting anythingon the merits of the case, this first bail application u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. filed onbehalf of the applicant is allowed.
6. It is directed that the applicant/accused be released on bail on hisfurnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand only)
with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Courtfor securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixedin this regard during trial. It is also directed that the applicant shall comply withthe provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
7. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case ofbail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall becomeineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
sumathi
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)JUDGE