High CourtsSingle Bench

Santosh Ahirwar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0067

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 306
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 101 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

26 paragraphs · 524 words

This is second bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn vide

order dated 14/10/2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No.41022/2019 with liberty to revive his prayer for bail after recording of some prosecution witnesses.

The applicant has been arrested on 25/05/2019 in connection with Crime No.83/2019 registered at Police Station Lateri, District Vidisha(M.P.) for

offence punishable under Section 306, 34 of IPC.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that this second application u/S.439 of Cr.PC has been filed after rejection of earlier one which

was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive his prayer for bail after recording of some prosecution witnesses. Now, prosecution witnesses have

been examined before the trial Court. The applicant is in custody since 25/05/2019. On the date of incident, the present applicant was not present at

the place. This version is also supported by statement given by son of the deceased. Marriage was solemnized 10-11 years earlier thereafter, no

complaint in relation to cruelty or mis-behaviour was done by the deceased. Death was totally accidental. The applicant has been falsely implicated in

the present case. There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the evidence, if he is released on bail. The applicant is ready to abide by

all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State 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.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the

applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac Only) with one surety in the like amount to

the satisfaction of the trial Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court 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 shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused failing which this order shall automatically loose its effect;

5.

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

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

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

C.c. as per rules.