Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/4445/2024 of DARSHAN YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT GWALIORBEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAVON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4445 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
DARSHAN YADAV S/O SHRI BABULAL YADAV, AGEDABOUT 40 YEARS, VILLAGE SUJA PATHARI DISTRICTVIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY MR. SUSHIL GOSWAMI - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICESTATION THROUGH POLICE STATION PATHARIDISTRICT VIDISHA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY MR. PRABHAKAR KUSHWAH - PANEL LAWYER)
.....RESPONDENT
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
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to Crime No.192 of 2023 registered at PoliceStation Pathari, District Vidisha (M.P.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) ofthe Excise Act.
Allegation against the present applicant is that 65.700 litres of illicitliquor has been seized from the possession of applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocentand has been falsely implicated. It is further argued that the applicant is incustody since 26.12.2023. Offence is triable by JMFC and trial is likely to take long time to conclude. Applicant is the permanent resident of District Vidisha(M.P.) and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with theprosecution evidence. Co-accused Kallu @ Mahendra Singh has already beengranted bail by this Court by order dated 24.1.2024 passed in MCRC No.3144of 2024 and case of the present applicant is in parity with co-accused. Hence,he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State vehemently opposedthe bail application citing criminal history of the applicant and prayed for itsdismissal.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diaryavailable on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but withoutexpressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it isdirected that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond inthe sum of Rs.25,000 (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with onesolvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committalcourt.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1) The applicant will comply with all the terms andconditions of the bond executed by him;
2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, asthe case may be;
3) The applicant will not indulge himself in extendinginducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted withthe facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her fromdisclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, asthe case may be;
4) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to theoffence of which he is accused;
5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournmentsduring the trial; and
6) The applicant will not leave India without previouspermission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the casemay 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