Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/50303/2020 of MANOJ VANSHKAR @ BACHCHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2020
Court Of Madhya PradeshThe High Court Of Madhya Pradesh MCRC-50303-2020
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.
Signature Not Verified
The High Court Of Madhya PradeshMCRC-50303-2020
(MANOJ VANSHKAR @ BACHCHIVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
[31][-][12][-][2020]Jabalpur, Dated :
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri S.K. Kashyap, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri J.S. Hora, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
With the consent, finally heard.
This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438of Cr.P.C. for offence under Section 147,148,149,307 and 294/34 of IPC inconnection with Crime No.481/20 registered at Police Station Ranjhi, DistrictJabalpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant is a Central Government employeeworking in Gun Carriage Factory (GCF) Jabalpur. He has been falselyimplicated relating to an incident which had taken place on 15.06.2020. Theinjured person was released on the next day i.e. 16.06.2020. The onlygrievous injury as per prosecution story is dislocation of thumb. As perprosecution case, main accused Sunil and Arun Vanshkar used a rod forassaulting the injured. Other co-accused persons have been enlarged onregular bail by the Court below or by this Court. Reliance is placed on orderdated 10.11.2020 passed in MCRC. No.38832/20 (Sunil Vanshkar &Others vs. State of M.P.). The applicant will cooperate with theinvestigation/trial. He will not influence the material/evidence in any manner,therefore by putting strict conditions he may be granted anticipatory bail.
Prayer is opposed by Shri Hora, learned Panel Lawyer. He submits thatas per his information regular bail is granted by this Court to co-accusedSunil and Arun Vanshkar. He is not aware whether regular bail has beengranted to rest of the co-accused by Court below. He further urged that sincethe applicant is not cooperating with the investigation, no seizure could bemade from him. If this Court intends to grant him anticipatory bail, strictconditions may be imposed.
Signature Not VerifiedSANDigitally signed by MOHAMMED MOHSINQURESHIDate: 2020.12.31 13:40:26 IST
I have heard the parties at length and perused the record.
Considering the fact that the applicant is a government employee, thereis no reason to disbelieve that he will flee from justice.
Considering the role allegedly played by the present applicant coupledwith the fact that certain co-accused persons have been granted regular bailand challan has been filed, I deem it proper to grant anticipatory bail to theapplicant subject to conditions that he will cooperate with the investigation (ifany) and trial, he shall not leave the Jabalpur without giving prior writtenintimation to the local Police Station, he will not influence theevidence/material etc. in any manner and he shall be available for questioningetc. before the police as per requirement.
Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the applicant Manoj Vanshkar @Bachchi be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond ina sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rs.Sixty Thousand only) along with one surety inthe like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer for his appearancebefore the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation as andwhen directed. Conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. shall also apply on theapplicant during currency of bail.
M.Cr.C is disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL)V. JUDGE
mohsin