High CourtsSingle Bench

Golu Meena vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 November 2019 · Citation: (2019) 11 MP CK 0079

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vishal Mishra, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 323, 326, 427, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 45718 Of 2019
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 · 557 words

This is second bail application u/S 439 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicants for grant of bail. First application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.09.2019 in M.Cr.C No. 38047/2019 with liberty to come again after conclusion of investigation.

The applicants have been arrested on 27.08.2019 by Police Station Karariya District Vidisha in connection with Crime No.102/2019 registered in relation to the offence punishable u/Ss. 323, 294, 506, 326, 427 and 34 of IPC.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that earlier bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.09.2019 in M.Cr.C No. 38047/2019 with liberty to come again after conclusion of investigation, now charge sheet has been filed on 17.10.2019. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that as per X-Ray report, the injuries inflicted by the applicants are found to be simple in nature. Learned counsel for applicants further submits that there is no criminal history against the present applicants. They are in custody since 27.08.2019. They are ready to abide by all the terms and condition as imposed by this Court. Upon these grounds, they pray for bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submits that merely by filing of charge-sheet does not entitle for grant of bail. He further submits that there is specific allegation against the present applicants. He fairly submits that there is no criminal antecedents against the present applicants.

Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the case dairy. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and alsoinvestigation is over, therefore, further custodial interrogation may not be necessary and there is no criminal antecedent against them, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.

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

1.

The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

2.

The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3.

The applicants will not indulge themselves 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;

4.

The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused;

5.

The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7.

The applicants shall mark their attendance before the concerned police station in the first week of every month, till conclusion of investigation (pending if any) and if charge sheet is being filed, they will mark their presence as per the directions issued by the concerning trial Court.

In event of failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions, the State authorities will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

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

C.c. as per rules.