Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 747 (MP)

Vinod v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-05-09

RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY

body2022
JUDGMENT Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J. - Heard with the aid of case diary. This is the fourth application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. applicant Vinod was arrested on 26/05/2019 in Crime No.273/2018 registered at Police Station Shahgarh, District Sagar (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the IPC. The first bail applications of the applicant was dismissed as withdraw by this Court vide order dated 4/9/2019 passed in M.Cr.C.No.31480/2019, second application was dismissed by this Court on merit vide order dated 07/12/2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.36721/2021 and third application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21/3/2022 passed in M.Cr.C.No.331/2022. As per prosecution case, on 06/10/2018, Pappu S/o Gokul Yadav informed the police that one human skeleton was lying in the forest of Madantala, Shahgarh. On that Police registered Merg No.40/2018 under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. and seized that human skeleton, one knife, jeans and other material from the spot. During investigation it was found that human skeleton was of Vickky @ Vikram Rajak, who was murdered. On that police registered the Crime No.273/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and investigated the matter. During investigation it was found that deceased Vickky @ Vikram Rajak had illicit relation with the wife of co-accused Rammu @ Ramratan, due to which on 28/09/2018 applicant Vinod ahirwar and co-accused Brijesh @ Bade, Umesh Vishwakarma and Rammu @ Ramratan murdered deceased Vickky @ Vikram Rajak and threw his dead body in the forest. On that police arrested the applicant and co-accused Brijesh @ Bade, Umesh Vishwakarma and Rammu @ Ramratan and also seized call details. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. Though, earlier bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 7/12/2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.36721/2021 but thereafter the co-accused Rammu @ Ramratan has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20/4/2022 passed in MCrC no.7767/2022. So, applicant is also entitled to get bail on the basis of parity. The applicant has been in custody since 26/5/2019, while trial is still pending and conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail. So, applicant is also entitled to get bail on the basis of parity. The applicant has been in custody since 26/5/2019, while trial is still pending and conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that the earlier bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed on merit, thereafter there is no change in circumstance, so applicant should not be released on bail. Though, earlier bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 07/12/2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.36721/2021 but thereafter co-accused Rammu @ Ramratan has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20/4/2022 passed in MCrC No.7767/2022, so, maintaining the parity and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 26/5/2019 while the trial is still pending and the conclusion of the trial will take time, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the concerned Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :- 1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him; 2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial; 3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be; 4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused; 5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6. The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. C.C. on payment of usual charges.