Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 379 (MP)

Praveen Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-03-07

G.S.AHLUWALIA

body2022
JUDGMENT G.S. ahluwalia, J. - This is first application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested on 20.02.2022 in connection with Crime No.58/2022 registered by Police Station City Kotwali, District Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 384, 388, 347, 323, 294, 120-B, 34 of IPC. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution case, the complainant lodged a report that he received a call on his mobile of the co-accused Babita Gurjar who informed that she is also in the business of diary and since the complainant is also in the business of diary, therefore, he may sell the ghee of her shop. after repeated calls made by Babita Gurjar, he went to the house of Babita Gurjar on 09.02.2022, where two persons came and started assaulting the complainant. They were calling each other as Brijlal and Deepak. They demanded money, and accordingly, he gave his 3 aTM cards to Deepak and amount of Rs.36,000/- were withdrawn from his aTM, and thereafter, they insisted that complainant should pay some more money, and accordingly, he took them to petrol pump and gave Rs.30,000/- to co-accused Babita after swapping the credit card. although the mobile and motor cycle were returned but the credit card and aTM cards were not returned. It is submitted that so far as the applicant is concerned, there is no allegation that he was ever involved in the commission of the aforesaid offence. The only allegation is that much prior to the incident, he was seen talking with co-accused Babita Gurjar and hatching conspiracy. No-one would hatch conspiracy in the open so that the same can be over heard by independent witnesses. applicant is in jail from 20.02.2021. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with prosecution case. Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the Counsel for the State as well complainant. It is submitted by Shri Chauhan that in fact the applicant is perpetrator of the offence and he had persuaded the co-accused Babita to commit the offence. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the nature of allegations and without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is submitted by Shri Chauhan that in fact the applicant is perpetrator of the offence and he had persuaded the co-accused Babita to commit the offence. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the nature of allegations and without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court. This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18/3/2021 in Criminal appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant. Certified copy as per rule.