Rahul vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Anil Verma, J

This is second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. His first

application was dismissed as withdrawn on 15/12/2021 vide M.Cr.C.No.61454/2021. The applicant is implicated in connection with Crime

No.540/2021 registered at Police Station â€" Amjhera, District Dhar (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 294, 324, 326, 506

and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 25(B) of the Arms Act. The applicant is in custody since 29/11/2021.

As per prosecution story, on 09/11/2021 complainant Lallu lodged an FIR against the applicant and co-accused person stating that when he was going

to his agricultural field along with his father Ramsingh, at that time applicants came there and started quarreling with him. They also abused him. On

objecting to the same, applicant Rahul caused injury to the complainant’s father Ramsingh by using a Falia and co-accused person Ritesh also

caused injury to Ramsingh by throwing stone. Thereafter, both the accused fled away from the spot. Accordingly, offence has been registered against

the applicant and other co-accused person.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody

since 29/11/2021. Final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Cross case has also been registered against the complainant party on

the same day at Crime No.541/2021 at Police Station Amjhera, District Dhar. Initially FIR was registered under Section 294, 324, 506 and 34 of the

IPC and later on Section 326 of the IPC has been added by the prosecution. The applicant is a young person of 23 years of age. He is the permanent

resident of Dhar District. Co-accused Ritesh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court on 15/12/2021 vide M.Cr.C.No.61454/2021 in similar

circumstances. Applicant has no past criminal record. Under the above circumstances and on the ground of parity, prayer for grant of bail may be

considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent â€" State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of

offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and also taking note of the fact that co-accused Ritesh has been enlarged on

bail, victim did not sustain any bone injury on his head, after perusal of the case diary it reveals that victim sustained one medieval bone injury (in Jaw),

cross case has also been registered against the complainant party, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 29/11/2021 and

final conclusion of the trial will take long sufficient. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. Therefore, without

commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with

one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall

abide by all the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C., Before releasing the applicant from the custody, the Jail Authorities are directed to

medically examine the applicant in order to rule out the possibility of Covid-19 infections and shall comply with the directions issued by the Hon’ble

Apex Court in W. P. No.01/2020.

Certified copy as per Rules.