Govardhan vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Sunita Yadav, J

This is second application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of bail. First application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 04/07/2022 in M.Cr.C. No.29331/2022.

The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.122/2020 registered at Police Station Crime Branch, District Gwalior for offence under Section 420 of IPC and added Sections 201 and 34 of IPC.

Prosecution story in brief is that on 12/9/2020, complainant Kailash Sahu filed a written application before Crime Branch alleging that he is having bank account bearing No. 348201000003178. On 12/9/2020, some unknown persons had withdrawn money from his account using ATM card. It is further alleged that on different dates at multiple times his money was withdrawn from his account by using the ATM card. Upon his report, case under Section 420 of IPC was registered at Crime No.122/2020. During investigation, the complainant identified present applicant as one of the persons who came to his petrol pump and was watching him withdraw the money and removed his ATM card and inserted his own card.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. In TIP, the complainant has not identified the present applicant. He has further argued that there is no prima facie evidence against the applicant and independent witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26/4/2022. Investigation in the matter is over by filing of chargesheet, therefore, further custodial interrogation is no more required. Hence, he deserves to be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor for the State submitted in view of gravity of offence as well as criminal history, the applicant/accused should not be granted bail.

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

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case specifically the complainant did not identify the applicant in TIP as well as after completion of investigation in the matter, charge-sheet has been filed, 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 o f Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties [out of which one should be local since the applicant is the resident of Palwal, Haryana] 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;

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

3 ) 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future. In case, if he is found involving in the offence of same nature, 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.