High CourtsSingle Bench

Kapil vs State Of M.P

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 10 June 2021 · Citation: (2021) 06 MP CK 0064

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subodh Abhyankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8, 15, 29 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 333, 353 · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.27205 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 · 550 words

Subodh Abhyankar, J

This is the second application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as he / she is implicated in connection with Crime No.545/2019

registered at Police Station Industrial Area, Jaora, District Ratlam (MP) for offence punishable under Section 8/15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 307, 147, 148, 149, 353, 332 and 333 of the IPC. The applicant is in custody since 12/07/2020. His

earlier bail application M.Cr.C. No.25960/2020 was dismissed by this Court on 11/08/2020.

As per prosecution story, co-accused persons were found in possession of 256 kg of poppy straw and the applicant has been implicated on the basis of

memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to be the person who purchased the said contraband and sold the same to other co-accused

person.

Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the bail application of the identically placed co-accused person Pritam M.Cr.C. No.23810/2021 has

already been allowed vide order dated 13/05/2021, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is further

submitted that there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time on account of

fresh spread of COVID-19. Hence, it is submitted that the bail application be allowed and he be released on bail.

Counsel for the respondent / State, on the other hand has opposed the prayer, however, it is not denied that except a memo prepared under Section 27

of the Evidence Act, no material is available on record to connect the applicant with the offence.

Having considered the rival submissions, on perusal of the case diary and taking note of the fact that the bail application of the identically placed co-

accused person Pritam M.Cr.C. No.23810/2021 has already been allowed vide order dated 13/05/2021 and except a memo prepared under Section 27

of the Evidence Act, no material is available on record to connect the applicant with the offence and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take

sufficient long time due to fresh spread of COVID-19, in the considered opinion of this Court, the applicant's application deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on

bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the

trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court

concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

It is also observed that if the applicant is found in any of the criminal activities, after his / her release on bail, then the present bail order shall stand

cancelled without further reference to this Court; and the State / prosecution will be free to arrest the accused in the present case also.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.