Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/56888/2023 of JAGDISH DHAKAD URF HALKE 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. 56888 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
JAGDISH DHAKAD URF HALKE S/O ALAM SINGH, AGEDABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR RESIDENTGRAM CHAWARA TEH AND THANA BARELI DISTRICTRAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI NARENDRA NIKHARE - ADVOCATE )
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICES TATI ON BARELI DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYAPRADESH)
(BY SMT. SUNITA SOOD - 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.768/2023 registered at Police Station - Bareli, District Raisen (M.P.) for theoffence punishable under Sections 450 and 376 of IPC. Applicant is indetention since 21.11.2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, prosecutrix lodged the report allegingthat on 18.11.2023 at about 4:00 pm, when no one was present in the house,applicant came there and tied the prosecutrix forcibly, due to which she became unconscious. On the basis of aforesaid, Police registered the case against thepresent applicant under the aforesaid Sections.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is in jailsince 21.11.2023. He has been falsely implicated. It is further submittedprosecutrix is a major lady having two children. It is further submittedprosecutrix in her 164 statement has not stated anything against the applicant.FSL report is also negative. Charge sheet has been filed. Therefore, it has beenprayed that the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State has opposed the prayerfor grant of bail to the applicant.
5. 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 Codeo f Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant, standsallowed.
6. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal 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.
7. 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 becomeineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sateesh
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)JUDGE