High CourtsSingle Bench

Bhoore Kushwaha vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 21 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 MP CK 0070

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunita Yadav, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 399, 400, 402 · Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 — Section 11, 13 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 25(b), 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 26032 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

17 paragraphs · 491 words

Sunita Yadav, J

The applicant has filed this First application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 20/04/2023 by Police Station Indargarh, District Datia in connection with Crime No. 174 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 399, 400 and 402 of IPC, Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act and Section 25/27, 25(b) of the Arms Act.

Allegations against the applicant/accused, is that he alongwith co-accused persons were planning to commit dacoity.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated. The applicant is in custody since 20/04/2023. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and therefore, further custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be required. It is further argued that the co-accused namely Chandrashekhar @ Chandu Jatav has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12/05/2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.19868 of 2023 and the case of present applicant is similar to co-accused. Hence, seeks parity and prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. It is submitted that the applicant has a criminal history.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one local solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court.

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

1) The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him/her;

2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

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

4) The applicant shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench.

5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6 ) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.