High CourtsSingle Bench

Balli Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 9 January 2024 · Citation: (2024) 01 MP CK 0019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anand Pathak, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 394 · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27
RESULT
Allowed/Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1030 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 485 words

Anand Pathak, J

1 . The applicant has filed this third bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 06.09.2023 by Police Station-Pichhore, District Gwalior in connection with Crime No.44/2023 registered for offence punishable under Sections 394 of IPC, Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act.

2.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is suffering confinement since 06.09.2023 and charge-sheet has already been filed. Leaned counsel for the applicant refers the fact that in statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of complainant namely Ramdhun, reference of four mask men who robbed the applicant is being referred but surprisingly in Test Identification Parade (TIP), same Ramdhun claims to have identified the present applicant. When the applicant was masked, as per version of complainant, then how he identified the applicant. Applicant bears criminal record of one case of minor denomination. Confinement since 06.09.2023 amounts to pretrial detention. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in trial. He would abide by all the terms and conditions as imposed by this Court. Under these grounds, he prayed for bail.

3 . Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of this bail application.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary.

5.

Considering the submissions advanced by the counsel for the parties and the period of custody, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is hereby directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

6.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-

(i) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

(ii) The applicant will co-operate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

(iii) The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence, of which he is accused;

(v) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

(vi) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

(vii) The applicant shall mark his presence on first Sunday of every month before the concerned police station between 10:00 am to 2:30 pm till conclusion of trial.

7.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

8.

A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance and information.

9.

Certified Copy as per rules.