Mithun Lodhi vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

I.A. No.7963/19, an application under section 301(2) of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Case Diary is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The applicant has filed this third application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The earlier applications have been dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 20/5/19 and 9/8/19 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.15433/19 and 32861/19.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Civil Line, Dehat, District Vidisha in connection with Crime No.795/2018 registered in relation to the offences punishable under sections 302, 201 of the IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act.

Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that owing to previous enmity, he not only committed murder of Bahuran Lodhi, but in order to wipe out the evidence also threw the dead body in water after tying it to a sack containing stones.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is neither any eye-witness nor witness of last seen, but the applicant has been arraigned on the basis of memorandum recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act. The dead body was not recovered at his instance. Until now, six prosecution witnesses have been examined and none of them says that applicant has killed the deceased. Moreover, Hema Kushwaha (PW2) has turned hostile. In the FSL report, no blood has been found on the Shirt and Pant of the applicant. The applicant is a permanent resident of Village Babaliya, District Raisen 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.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the application and prayed for its rejection contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. It is submitted that Hemabai (PW1), wife of the deceased, in her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C., as well as, evidence before the trial Court, has categorically deposed about the complicity of the applicant in the offence. Besides, the applicant is trying to tamper with the prosecution evidence and induce the prosecution witnesses and in this regard an FIR has been registered at Crime No.660/19. Accordingly, it is submitted that no indulgence is warranted.

Considering the nature of allegations and gravity of offence, in the opinion of this Court, no case for grant of bail is made out.

The application, accordingly, stands dismissed.