Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 547 (MP)

Chhote Batham v. State of M. P.

2015-05-07

S.K.PALO

body2015
ORDER 1. This is the third application under section 439 of the CrPC. 2. First application was dismissed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 10816/2014 on 11.12.2014, before the charge sheet has been filed. 3. Second application was dismissed for want of prosecution. 4. The applicant has been arrested on 17.10.2014 in connection with Crime No.781/2014 registered at Bahodapur district Gwalior for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 323, 294/34 and section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. 5. As per the allegations, the complainant Sunny came to the Police Station, Bahodapur with injured Pradeep and lodged a report on 3.10.2014 that near the gate of Pooran Batham's house and Vishnu Pandit, a “Mata Jagran” was being performed along with others. Complainant was also participating in the dance. At that time, he had altercation with Vijay, who abused him with obscene words. When the complainant said him not to abuse, younger brother of Vijay (Chhote Batham who is present applicant) came there and slapped thrice. Complainant's elder brother Pradeep Batham when tried to intervene, accused/applicant Chhote with intent to kill stabbed knife at the chest of Pradeep. When he tried to save him, co-accused Vijay also stabbed the complainant by knife. When mother of the complainant Smt. Sheela tried to intervene, accused Mukesh and accused Manoj Batham beaten them. Pradeep died later. Therefore, the earlier Crime No.781/2014 under sections 307, 323, 294, 34 of IPC and section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (POA) Act, enhanced section 302 of IPC. 6. On behalf of the applicant Chhote Batham, it is submitted that the applicant is innocent. Charge sheet has been filed on 21.12.2014. Earlier the applicant could not satisfy the Court that he was also injured in the incident. The applicant has come-up with further ground that applicant Chotte lodged the report on 14.4.2014 as Crime No.782/2014 registered at Police Station, Bahodapur District Gwalior. It is also stated that on the report of applicant crime was registered against Pradeep (now dead) and complainant Sunny Parihar. The applicant was also injured as he received knife blow on the stomach. In support of the same discharge certificate from J.A Hospital has been filed. It shows the applicant was admitted on 4.10.2014 and discharged on 17.4.2014. An operation was performed on the right Abdominal uterus. Thereafter, the applicant was taken into custody in the present case. The applicant was also injured as he received knife blow on the stomach. In support of the same discharge certificate from J.A Hospital has been filed. It shows the applicant was admitted on 4.10.2014 and discharged on 17.4.2014. An operation was performed on the right Abdominal uterus. Thereafter, the applicant was taken into custody in the present case. It is further claimed that the applicant is in custody for more then six months. Therefore, he be given the benefit of regular bail. 7. Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection. 8. Considered. 9. There is no criminal antecedents against the applicant. Incident occurred due to sudden fight at the place of 'Mata Jagran'. The applicant also sustained grievous injury because of which the applicant was hospitalized for about fifteen days. These facts were not discussed earlier. 10. Keeping in view that the facts and circumstance of this case and the applicant is in custody since 17.10.2014, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it proper to extend the benefit of bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. 11. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lac only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for securing his presence before the concerned Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial. 12. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant : 1. The applicant will not interfere or influence the prosecution witnesses; 2. The applicant will make himself available or represent through his counsel on early date of proceedings 3. The applicant will not indulge in any similar offences during the pendency of the trial. 4. If the applicant found breach of any of the conditions above, the learned trial Court would be at liberty to reconsider on the question of bail. 13. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court for compliance.