High CourtsSingle Bench

Shivraj Singh Tomar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 13 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 MP CK 0029

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunita Yadav, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 24198 Of 2023
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

17 paragraphs · 507 words

Sunita Yadav, J

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to FIR No.203 of 2023 registered at Police Station - Station Road, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC.

Allegation against the present applicant is that he being posted as Patwari manipulated the records and got the land in dispute mutated in the name of Nathuram.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Dispute is of civil in nature. The mutation was recorded by him on account of order of Tehsildar dated 22.7.2022 which was passed on the basis of judgment dated 11.9.2019 passed by Civil Judge, Class II, Morena. Further argument is that the applicant is a government servant and is in custody since 15.5.2023. He has no criminal antecedents and is the permanent resident of District Morena (M.P.), therefore, there is no possibility of his absconsion or tempering with prosecution case. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application and argued that mutation order was passed only on account of wrong information / report given by the present applicant - accused, therefore, he should not be granted bail.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal 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/she is accused;

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.

Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.