High CourtsSingle Bench

Rohit vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 3 September 2021 · Citation: (2021) 09 MP CK 0027

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subodh Abhyankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2), 49A · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 328 · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.43472 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

11 paragraphs · 514 words

Subodh Abhyankar, J

This is the first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, filed by the applicant for grant of bail during trial.

The applicant is facing trial in connection with Crime No.518/2020 registered at Police Station Bilpank, District Ratlam (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 34(2), 49-A of M.P. Excise Act and Section 328 of IPC, 1860. The applicant is i n custody since 03/08/2021.

Allegation against the applicant is that he was in also involved in the case wherein 153 bulk liters of unauthorised liquor along with certain implements for manufacturing the same has been seized from the possession of the co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and he is implicated only on the basis of memo under Section 27 of Evidence Act at the instance of co-accused Ankush. It is further submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 03/08/2021 and the final disposal of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time on account of fresh spread of COVID-19. Co-accused Sachin has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 24/08/2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.41914/2021 and the case of the applicant is similar to that of Sachin. Hence, it is submitted that the applicant be released on bail on the ground of parity.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer. However, it is not denied that there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant and under identical circumstances, the coaccused persons have been granted bail by this Court.

Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary, so also the documents on record, this Court finds force with the contentions raised by Counsel for the applicant and taking note of the fact that the applicant is in jail since 03/08/2021, co-accused persons have already been released on bail and the final conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time, this Court finds it expedient to allow this application.

Accordingly, without adverting to the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is hereby allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) 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 after being released on bail, if the applicant again indulges himself in any criminal activity, the present bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference to the Court and the State/Prosecution shall be entitled to arrest the applicant 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.