High CourtsSingle Bench

Kapil Tomar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 26 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0177

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.A. Dharmadhikari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 427 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 6895 Of 2020
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

30 paragraphs · 554 words

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The applicant has filed this repeat application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The earlier one was dismissed as withdrawn vide

order dated 14/1/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.50429/2019.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Station Road, District Morena, in connection with Crime No.114/2019 registered in relation to the

offences punishable under sections 307, 427, 147, 148, 149 of the IPC and 25,27 of the Arms Act.

Allegations against the applicant as well as co-accused persons Pramod alias Pampo Mahore, Kanha Pandit and Chhotu alias Vicky, in short, are that

all of them damaged Bolero vehicle and with common intention to kill the complainant and his nephew, fired from Katta.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 22/8/2019. Charge-sheet has been

filed. No further custodial interrogation is required. No one has been injured in the fire. Material witnesses have not supported the prosecution version

at the trial. Co-accused persons have already been given the benefit of bail and the applicant deserves parity in treatment. He is a permanent resident

of New Aampura, District Morena and there is no likelihood of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. With the aforesaid

submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material

available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.

However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of

liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant namely Kapil Tomar

be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on the dates given by the concerned 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 seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

5.

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

6.

If the applicant commits any offence while on bail, this order shall automatically stand cancelled without reference to the Court.

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

C.c. as per rules.