Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 184 (MP)

Manish Kumar Rajak v. State Of M. P.

2020-02-05

RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. This is the second application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. Applicant Manish Kumar Rajak was arrested on 12.04.2019 in Crime No. 364/2019 registered at Police Station T.T. Nagar, District Bhopal for the offence punishable under Section 302, 380, 450, 201 of IPC. 2. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 06.09.2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 32743/2019. 3. As per the prosecution case, on 10.04.2019 Govind Vishwakarma informed the police that the dead bodies of his tenants Dalchand Rajak and his wife Smt. Beti Bai were lying in their rented house No. 217 located at Priyadarshani Nagar, Bhopal and somebody has murdered them. On that police registered Crime No.364/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 380, 450, 201 of IPC and investigated the matter. During the investigation it was found that the applicant is the nephew of the deceased Dalchand because Dalchand had no son, he often used to come to Dalchand's house and kept doing his minor work and was a confidant of Dalchand. He took advantage of Dalchand's trust, stole Dalchands ATM card and withdrew Rs. 10.41 lakhs from Dalchand's bank account. When deceased Dalchand came to know this fact, the applicant murdered Dalchand and his wife Beti Bai. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Police only on the basis of a memorandum of the applicant and alleged seizure of ATM card of deceased Dalchand at the instant of the applicant, implicated the applicant in the crime. It is alleged that the applicant withdrew 10.41 lakhs from the bank account of deceased Dalchand. But from the statement of Satish Yadav (PW-3), it is clear that deceased Dalchand gave Rs. 8 lakhs to him for construction of his house. The statements of other prosecution witnesses have also been recorded by the trial court. They did not state anything against the applicant. The charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since 12.04.2019 and the conclusion of the trial will take time, hence prayed for the release of the applicant on bail. 5. The statements of other prosecution witnesses have also been recorded by the trial court. They did not state anything against the applicant. The charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since 12.04.2019 and the conclusion of the trial will take time, hence prayed for the release of the applicant on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Even Nikhlesh (PW-5) in his court statement has clearly stated that on the date of incident at about 2:00 pm applicant came to deceased Dalchand's house and at around 3-3:30 pm, he went out from the house and thereafter, at 5:00 pm Dalchand and his wife Beti Bai were found dead in their house. Police also seized Dalchands ATM card on the information given by the applicant. So, the applicant should not be released on bail. 6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, allegations and the strength of evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant during investigation this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence application is rejected.