Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1051 (MP)

Sonu v. State Of Madhya Pradesh

2020-10-08

SANJAY DWIVEDI

body2020
JUDGMENT Sanjay Dwivedi, J. - Heard. 2. This first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.480/2020 registered at Police Station-Kotwali, District Khandwa (M.P.), for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 34, 201, 212 and 120- B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(2) of the Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the case of the prosecution the only allegation against the present applicant is that he supplied a knife to the main accused before 20-25 days of the date of incident. He further submits that no seizure has been made from the present applicant. He also submits that though a case of criminal conspiracy has been projected by the prosecution only on the basis of memorandum of the co-accused person namely Nigam Patel which, according to him, is not admissible. He also submits that to substantiate any criminal conspiracy as has been projected by the prosecution neither any evidence nor any material has been produced by the prosecution. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2020, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that in view of the offence committed by the applicant Section 120-B of the IPC has been registered against him. He further submits that the applicant was involved in the said criminal conspiracy, therefore, he is equally responsible for committing the murder and as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the fact that the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2020, so also considering the outbreak of pandemic (COVID-19) in the country, I am of the opinion that the applicant can be enlarged on bail, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 6. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 7. 6. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 7. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 8. The jail authority is also directed to ensure that before his release, the applicant is examined by the jail doctor to ascertain that he is not afflicted with the COVID-19 virus. If the doctor suspects otherwise, the applicant shall be referred to the appropriate hospital for further management as per the protocol laid down by the State. In the event the jail doctor is of the opinion that the applicant can be released, then he shall be released. 9. Certified copy as per rules. 10. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through E-mail.