High CourtsSingle Bench

Devi Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0085

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 201, 302
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.39846 Of 2021
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

32 paragraphs · 604 words

Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J

This is first application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. Applicant Devi Singh was arrested on 20/11/2020 in Crime No. 181/2020 registered at Police

Station Shivpur, District Hoshangabad (MP) for the offence punishable under Sections 201 and 302 of IPC.

As per prosecution case, on 18/11/2020 complainant Shyam, son of deceased Narmada Prasad informed the police that on 17/11/2020 at around 9

p.m., his father went to his field, thereafter, he did not return and his dead body was lying at Khairi road near Kalamwale culvert. On that, police

registered merg no.0/2020 and inquired the matter. During inquiry, it was found that applicant and co-accused Laxminarayan murdered him. Police

also seized one Aadhar card of co-accused Laxminarayan from the spot and also arrested the applicant on 20/11/2020 and seized blood stained

clothes from their possession.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no direct evidence on

record to connect the applicant with the crime. There is no eyewitness of the incident to show that the applicant murdered deceased. Police only on

the basis of memorandum of applicant and allegedly seizure of blood stained clothes from the possession of the applicant, implicated the applicant in

the crime while memorandum of the applicant is not admissible in evidence. Regarding seizure of blood stained clothes in the FSL report it is not

mentioned that blood found on the seized clothes was matched with the blood group of the deceased. So only on that basis, it cannot be said that the

applicant murdered the deceased. The applicant has been in custody since 20.11.2020. Charge sheet has been filed and the conclusion of trial will take

time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the applicant with the

offence in question and the applicant has criminal past, so he should not be released on bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the contention of learned counsel for the applicant and the strength of evidence collected by

the prosecution against the applicant and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 20.11.2020, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial

will take time, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his

furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned

C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of

trial.

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;

2.

The applicant will cooperate in the trial;

3.

The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact 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 will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.