High CourtsSingle Bench

Guddu @ Hradesh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0083

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294, 307, 506B
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.39887 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

26 paragraphs · 519 words

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J

This is fourth bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The applicant is in custody since 20.06.2021 in connection with C r i me No.02/2016 registered at Police Station-Bamitha, Distt.- Chhatarpur, (M.P.)

for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 307/34 & 506-B of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant-accused submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that vide order dated

03.10.2016 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 17369/2016, applicant-accused was granted bail by this Court on the condition to appear before the Trial Court on

19.07.2017 but on the said date, he could not appear, so learned Trial Court issued warrant of arrest. In pursuance thereof, the applicant has been

taken into custody on dated 20.06.2021. He further submits that the applicant has gone to Delhi for doing labourship. He does not have the knowledge

of his appearance in the Trial Court. His absence is bonafide. The conclusion of its trial will take time due to outbreak of pandemic of COVID-19.

There is no chance of applicant's absconding and tampering with the evidence. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, looking to the

facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that applicant-accused has already been granted bail by this Court but he could not appear

because he has gone to Delhi for labourship from which it appears that his absence was bonafide but without expressing any view on the merits of the

case, this Court of the view that applicant-Guddu @ Hradesh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh)

with two solvent sureties of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, to appear before the trial Court on the

dates given by the concerned Court. This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

It is directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease

(COVID-19)' the applicant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing.

In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the applicant shall also comply the rules and norms of social distancing.

Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction

to the jail authority:-

1.

The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release.

2 . The applicant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.

3 . If it is found that the applicant is suffering from 'Corona Vi r us disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in

appropriate quarantine facility.

Certified copy as per rules.