Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/51745/2018 of ADIL KHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE Adil Khan Vs. State of M.P. M.Cr.C.
M.Cr.C. No.51745 of 2018
-Indore, Dated: 31/12/2018
Shri Yashpal Rathore, learned Counsel for thepetitioner—Adil Khan.
Shri Suraj Sharma, learned Public Prosecutor forthe respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
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.
O R D E R
1. This is second bail application under Section 439of Cr.P.C filed by petitioner—Adil Khan in connectionwith Crime No.151/2018, under Section 457 and 380 ofthe IPC registered at Police Station – Neemuch Cantt.,District—Neemuch. He is in custody since 28.5.2018.
2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for thepetitioner that the complainant and Narendra witnessof identification have turned hostile. It is furthersubmitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falselybeen implicated in the present case. There is noevidence against him. Conclusion of trial is likely totake time. The petitioner is permanent resident ofHaryana. There is no possibility of his absconding. Heis ready to furnish adequate security.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner made a statementat Bar that no criminal antecedents is attributed to the petitioner.
4. The Prosecution has opposed the bail application.
5. According to the prosecution case, the allegationagainst the petitioner is that he alongwith the co-accused persons shattered an ATM of State Bank ofIndia, and stolen about Rs.16,79,700/-. Duringinvestigation, the police collected CCTV footage, but asper the affidavit filed by the Investigation Officer ShriJitendra Singh Bhadoria, faces are not clear in theseCCTV footage, but he assumed on the basis of the bodystructure that the miscreant may be the petitioner.
6. Considering the evidence collected by theprosecution to show involvement of the petitioner, Ideem it proper to release him on bail. Therefore,without commenting on merits of the case, theapplication is allowed.
7. It is directed that the petitioner Adil Khan S/oMehbub Khan Chaudhry be released from custodyon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum ofRs.1,00,000/-(One Lakh Only) with two suretiesof Rs.50,000/- each(out of which one shall belocal) of the like amount to the satisfaction of the TrialCourt for his appearance before the Trial Court as andwhen required further subject to the followingconditions:
(i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trialand shall not seek unnecessary adjournments onfrivolous grounds to protract the trial;
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectlyallure or make any inducement, threat orpromise to the prosecution witnesses, so as todissuade them from disclosing truth before theCourt;
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offenceor involve in any criminal activity;
(iv) In case of his involvement in any othercriminal activity or breach of any other aforesaidconditions, the bail granted in this case may alsobe cancelled.
pp/
(Virender Singh) VacationJudge
Digitally signed by Pankaj Pandey
Date: 2018.12.31 16:22:47 +05'30'