Madhya Pradesh High Court
CRA/1588/2024 of RAMKUMAR GURJAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAVON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1588 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1.RAMKUMAR GURJAR S/O SHRI MOHAR SINGH,AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ADHYANGRAM UTILA DISTRICT GWALIOR MP (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.SANI RAJAK S/O SHRI PRATAP RAJAK, AGEDABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENTHINGONAKALA MORENA DIST. MORENA(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(MR. VISHWANATH PRATAP SINGH TOMAR - ADVOCATE FOR THEAPPELLANTS)
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGEPOLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE THANAUTILA DISTRICT GWALIOR MP (MADHYAPRADESH)POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE THANAUTILA DISTRICT GWALIOR MP (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.FARIYADI CRIME NO. 173/2023 THROUGH POLICETHANA UTEELA DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYAPRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(MS. KALPANA PARMAR - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT NO. 1 -STATE)
This appeal 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
This is first criminal appeal under Section 14-A (1) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as "SC/ST Act") filed by the appellants assailing the order dated25.1.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gwalior (M.P.) whereby,application preferred by the appellants herein under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.relating to FIR No. 173 of 2023 registered at Police Station Uteela, DistrictGwalior (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 294, 323, 506, 34 and 327 ofIPC and Sections 3(1)(da)(dha), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act hasbeen rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellants argued that appellants are innocentand has been falsely implicated. He has been arrayed as an accused on accountof some dispute over money transaction of Rs.5000/-. The injury allegedlycaused by the appellants is simple in nature. Further argument is that appellantsare in custody since 22.1.2024. Material part of the investigation has alreadybeen concluded, therefore, there is no requirement of further custodialinterrogation of the appellants. The appellants No. 1 and 2 are the permanentresident of District Gwalior and Morena respectively. Conclusion of trial islikely to take time and there is no likelihood of their absconsion, if released onbail. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the appellants.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the appeal andprayed for its rejection.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but withoutcommenting upon the merits of the case, this appeal stands allowed and it isdirected that the appellants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond inthe sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solventsurety in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned trialCourt/Committal Court.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the appellants:-
1. The appellants will comply with all the terms andconditions of the bond executed by them;
2. The appellants will cooperate in the investigation/trial,as the case may be; 3 . The appellants will not indulge themselves inextending inducement, threat or promise to any personacquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuadehim/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to thePolice Officer, as the case may be;
4. The appellants shall not commit an offence similar tothe offence of which they are accused;
5. The appellants will not seek unnecessaryadjournments during the trial; and
6. The appellants will not leave India without previouspermission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information andnecessary action.
E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
AKS
(SUNITA YADAV)JUDGE