High CourtsSingle Bench

Bhanupratap Jatav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 8 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 MP CK 0034

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anand Pathak, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 364A, 467, 468 · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13 · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed/Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 40057 Of 2023
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

18 paragraphs · 488 words

Anand Pathak, J

1 . The applicant has filed this second application under Section 439 of Code o f Criminal Procedure for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 31.08.2023 by Police Station Chinor, District Gwalior relating to Crime No.24/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 364A, 467, 468 of IPC and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.

2 . This is the case of bail jump and applicant is suffering confinement since 31.08.2023 on the pretext that on 25.03.2023 he remained absent before the trial Court therefore, arrest warrant was issued and he was consequently arrested.

3.

It is the submission of counsel for the applicant that on 25.03.2023, lawyer were abstaining from work therefore, he could not cause his appearance before the trial Court and therefore, his absence was recorded. Even otherwise, he suffered sufficient period of custody earlier and his source of implication is memo under Section 27 of Evidence Act therefore, a chance be given for course correction. He undertakes to cooperate in trial. Upon these grounds, counsel prayed for grant of bail.

4.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the basis of past criminal record of seven cases and prayed for dismissal of application.

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

6 . Considering the above submissions and the reason for absence, but without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court intends to allow this application but with certain stringent conditions. Accordingly, 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 one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

7.

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) Applicant shall mark his presence regularly as and when required and shall not be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant party in any manner.

8.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

9.

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

Certified Copy as per rules.