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
8 paragraphs · 504 wordsPrakash Chandra Gupta, J
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is third application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant/accused, relating to FIR/Crime No.537/2023 dated (not mentioned) registered at Police Station - Petlawad, District Jhabua (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 379 and 409 of IPC.
His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 05.10.2023 passed in MCRC No.39368/2023 with liberty to renew his prayer after examination of material witnesses before the Trial Court. Thereafter, his second bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 13.02.2024 passed in MCRC No.4293/2024.
3 . Prosecution story in brief is that on 03.08.2023, the complainant Sardar had lodged an FIR stating that he is working in ESAF cooperative bank (Micro Finance) as customer service executive. He also does work of money collection. On 02.08.2023 at 08:30 PM, he was going back to the bank branch by motorcycle carrying, collected amount of Rs.2,33,915/-, two receipt books and a rain coat, in a bag. On the way, he stopped for nature’s call, then 2 unknown persons came by motorcycle and took his bag containing the aforementioned articles and fled away from the spot. During investigation, it was found that the complainant had lodged false report alleging a concocted story. Therefore, on 10.02.2023, the complainant/accused has been arrested and on the same day the black bag containing stolen articles and cash of Rs.2,28,915/- has been seized at the instance of the accused.
4 . Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that the applicant has not committed the offence and he has falsely been implicated in the case. It is submitted that after dismissal of his second bail application on merit, seizure witnesses namely, Arun Sharma (PW-2) and Lokendra (PW-3) have been examined before the Trial Court. Arun Sharma (PW-2) has supported the case o f prosecution in his deposition but in paragraph-14 of cross-examination, he admitted that the police had not enquired the accused before him. It is also submitted that Lokendra (PW-3) has completely turned hostile and has not supported the case of prosecution. Applicant is in custody since 10.08.2023. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, in the changed circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
5 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicant/State has objected the prayer and submits that material witness/Manager of the concerned bank Rajkumar (PW-1) has supported the case of prosecution in his statement. Seizure witness Arun Sharma (PW-2) has also supported the case of prosecution. There is no change in the circumstances after dismissal of his earlier bail application hence, applicant is not entitled for bail.
Having considered the rival submissions and after perusal of the case diary so also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that there is no change in the circumstances to consider this repeat bail application. Resultantly, this repeat application for bail is dismissed.