High CourtsSingle Bench

Vakil Khan vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 18 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0087

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.A. Dharmadhikari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1539 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

28 paragraphs · 534 words

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The applicant has filed this repeat application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The earlier one was allowed vide order dated 26/9/18

passed in M.Cr.C. No.32250/2018.

After being arrested by Police Station Bahodapur, District Gwalior, in connection with Crime No.656/2018 registered in relation to the offence

punishable under section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, the applicant was released on bail vide order dated 26/9/18. However, he did not appear

before the trial Court on 20/9/19 and, therefore, the bail order stood cancelled for non compliance of peremptory condition no.7 stipulated therein.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was regularly appearing before the trial Court. However, on 13/10/19 he was arrested in

some other offence and prior to that could not appear before the trial Court on a date as he had gone to Maharashtra, therefore, could not appear

before the trial Court in compliance of condition no.7 imposed vide order dated 26/9/18 (Supra). The applicant is in custody since 13/10/19 and assures

that now if released on bail he shall abide by the conditions and there is no possibility of his fleeing from justice.

In response, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case coupled with the fact that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of

liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant, though on comparatively stringent conditions.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant namely Vakil Khan be

released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac only) with two solvent and local sureties of

Rs.50,000/- each (Rupees fifty thousand) to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance 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 will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

5.

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

6.

The applicant shall appear before the trial Court once in every month during pendency of the trial.

7.

If the applicant commits any offence while on bail, this order shall stand cancelled without reference to the Court.

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

C.c. as per rules.