Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1007 (MP)

Meera Buksha v. State of M. P.

2012-10-05

SHEEL NAGU

body2012
Judgment Sheel Nagu, J.;- 1. Case Diary is perused. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. 2. This is first application under Section 439 Cr. P.C. by the applicant for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested in connection with crime No. 97/2012, registered at Police Station-Badoda, District- Sheopur (M.P.) u/S. 394 of IPC and Section 11/13 MPDVPK Act on 20/06/2012, since when applicant is in judicial custody. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor for respondent/State has opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegation and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. 4. Considering the fact that the applicant is in custody since 20/06/2012 and the prosecution story indicates that the applicant after the assault have taken place gave exhortation and some stolen cash and motor cycle has been recovered and apart from giving exhortation, no other overtact has been alleged against the applicant who though has some criminal antecedent but looking to the nature of involvement of the applicant and trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date and prolonged pretrial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant but with certain stringent conditions. 5. Accordingly, the present application is allowed and it is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 6. This order will remain 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 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. 5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he 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. 7. Looking to the nature of offence, the applicant will mark his attendance before the concerning trial court once in a week. 7. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. Certified copy as per rules.