High CourtsSingle Bench

Deepak Ahirwar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 27 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 MP CK 0032

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anand Pathak, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 307, 323 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 49664 Of 2022
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

16 paragraphs · 503 words

Anand Pathak, J

The applicant has filed this Second bail application u/S.439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 02.09.2022 in M.Cr.C. No. 41899 of 2022.

Applicant has been arrested on 07.07.2022 by Police Station- Tyonda, District- Vidisha, in connection with Crime No.139 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 323 and 34 of IPC.

I t is the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that he is suffering confinement since 07.07.2022 and charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, chance of tampering with evidence/witnesses is remote. It is further submitted that alleged incident occurred on 28th of June, 2022 and, immediately thereafter, at PHC, Pre-MLC of the complainant was carried out in which only one injury over his forehead was referred. Thereafter, on 29th of June, 2022, he appeared before the concerned doctor at Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal, where he referred the fact regarding falling from the motorcycle as the cause of injury. Surprisingly, on 5th of July, 2022, dehati nalsi was made in which for the first time, complainant referred alleged incident in such a manner wherein the applicant inflicted injury to him. According to learned counsel for the applicant, medical report belies the allegations and case is fabricated just to implicate the applicant. He does not bear criminal record. Confinement amounts to pretrial detention. Under these grounds, he prayed for bail.

Learned State counsel opposed the prayer and prayed for its dismissal. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents appended.

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the fact situation, 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 one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

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

1.

The applicant shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2.

The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3.

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

4.

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

5.

The applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

6.

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

7.

The applicant shall not commit any offence of same nature in future. Application stands allowed and disposed of.

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

Certified copy as per rules.