Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/3189/2024 of AMIT YADAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPURBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWALON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3189 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
AMIT YADAV S/O SHRI MUNIRAJ YADAV, AGED ABOUT25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR PADRA NAIBASTI JPROAD POLICE STATION CIVIL LINE DISTRICT REWA(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI D.S.DUBEY - ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICESTATION CHORHATA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SHRI PANKAJ TIWARI - 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 bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail relating to CrimeNo.461/2023 registered at Police Station - Chorhata District Rewa (M.P.) forthe offence punishable under Sections 341, 327, 394, 23, 329, 427, 506/34 ofIPC. Applicant is in detention since 04.12.2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, allegation against the applicant is that healongwith other people had beaten the complainant by kick and fists. Policeregistered the case against the present applicant under the aforesaid Sections.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is in jailsince 04.12.2023. He has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that thepresent applicant was not present at the spot. The only allegation against theapplicant is that he had beaten the complainant using kicks and fists.Complainant has submitted affidavit stating that the present applicant was notpresent on the spot. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant may bereleased on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State has opposed the prayerfor grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of his criminal past.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that he has noobjection if the applicant is granted benefit of bail and he has submitted anaffidavit in regard to his no objection.
6. Having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of thecase, but without commenting on merit of the case, I am inclined to release theapplicant on bail. Consequently, bail application under Section 439 of the Codeof Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant, standsallowed.
7. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing apersonal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) withone solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for hisregular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that heshall remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by itduring trial. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section437(3) of Cr.P.C.
8. 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 become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
anu
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)JUDGE