Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 216 (MP)

Mohan Raghuvanshi v. State of M. P.

2014-02-17

B.D.RATHI

body2014
Judgment B.D. Rathi, J:- This is the first application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. Case diary has been produced by the Public Prosecutor. Arguments heard and case-diary perused. 2. It is argued on behalf of applicant/accused that the applicant has been falsely implicated. The evidence collected by the prosecution, is wholly unreliable. The accused is in jail since 26.8.2013 for no fault. The charge-sheet has already been filed and there is no further need of accused in investigation. 3. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prayed for grant of bail. On behalf of the State Government, it is argued by the Public Prosecutor that on the basis of allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. He prays for rejection of this application. 4. In view of the arguments advanced by both the counsel and on considering the facts and M.Cr.C.No.744/2014 (Mohan Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P.) circumstances of the case, it is clear that the applicant has been arrested on 26.8.2013 in connection with Crime No.182/2013 registered at Police Station Padav, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under section 364 of IPC and section 13 of the M.P.D.V.P.K. Act. 5. As per prosecution story, one missing person report was lodged by one Hari Shankar Namdeo on 25.4.2012, who is father of Awadh alias Sagar (deceased). Thereafter on 26.8.2013 one skeleton was found in jungle of Mandav, District Dhar. During investigation memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act was recorded and on that basis present applicant has been made accused. In this case charge-sheet has already been filed. No direct evidence is available. One co-accused Lakhan Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 13.1.2014 passed in M.Cr.C.No.10397/2013. 6. The trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date and prolong pretrial detention is an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, looking to the facts that final M.Cr.C.No.744/2014 (Mohan Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P.) disposal of the case will take time, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. 7. Accordingly, looking to the facts that final M.Cr.C.No.744/2014 (Mohan Raghuvanshi Vs. State of M.P.) disposal of the case will take time, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the present application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court on the condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during the trial and shall also comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. and so also as imposed by the trial Court. A copy of this order be sent to for compliance to the Court concerned.