High CourtsSingle Bench

Sheikh Daniya vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0039

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Awasthi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376(2)(n), 450, 506 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 25, 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 5529 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

21 paragraphs · 442 words

This second application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime

No.595/2019 registered at Police Station Rajendra Nagar, Indore District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 450, 376 (2) (n) and 506

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

As per prosecution case, on the basis of the allegations made by the prosecutrix regarding house trespass, criminal intimidation and commission of

rape on the pretext of marriage, the case has been registered against the present applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present

crime. The applicant is in custody since 24.08.2019. Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated

18.12.2019 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.51042/2019 granting liberty to renew his prayer after recording court statement of the

prosecutrix. Now, statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded before the trial Court on 27.01.2020 and she has not stated any thing against the

applicant and turns hostile. Under these circumstances, no alleged offence is made out against the applicant. The investigation is over and charge

sheet has already been filed. There is no possibility of his absconsion or tempering the evidence, if enlarged on bail. Conclusion of the trial will take

sufficiently long time. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that no sufficient ground is

made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he prayed for rejection of the application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the

merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his / her 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 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) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

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.