Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 864 (MP)

Ashok Shukla v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-06-27

RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard with the aid of case diary. 2. This is the fifth application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Applicant Ashok Shukla was arrested on 15.07.2020 in connection with Crime No.171/2020 registered at Police Station Sohagi, District Rewa (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 21, 22 of NDPS Act and Section 5/13 of M.P. Drugs Control Act. 3. The first bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.09.2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.25619/2020, second and third bail applications were dismissed on merit vide orders dated 20.11.2020 & 28/07/2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.40618/2020 & 16725/2021 and fourth bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.11.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.46733/2021. 4. A s per the prosecution case, on 15/07/2020, on the information of the informant that three persons were transporting illegal cough syrup in a car bearing registration No.DD-01-A-0339 and was coming from Prayagraj (U.P.) to Rewa side, Sheshmani Verma, Assistant Sub-Inspector Police Station Sohagi, District Rewa along with police force went to National Highway No.30 near Sohagi Toll Plaza and waited for that vehicle. Sometime later he saw that car coming from Prayagraj side. On that he stopped that vehicle, which was being driven by applicant Ashok Shukla and co-accused Manish Kumar Tiwari and Sourabh Mishra were also travelling in that vehicle. 5. On search of said vehicle, he found 360 bottles of Wings Onerex cough syrup of 100 ml each containing 10 mg. (Codeine 3 Phosphate) in each 5 ml dose, which was being transported illegally by them in that car. On that he seized said cough syrup and arrested the applicant from the spot. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. Though earlier bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merit, this Court vide order dated 08.11.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.46733/2021 directed the trial Court to dispose of the case within a period of six months, but the trial is still pending. 7. The statements of both the independent witnesses of the seizure memo Sanjay Gupta (PW-1) and Sahil Gupta (PW-2) have been recorded by the trial Court. 8. They did not support the prosecution story and turned hostile. 7. The statements of both the independent witnesses of the seizure memo Sanjay Gupta (PW-1) and Sahil Gupta (PW-2) have been recorded by the trial Court. 8. They did not support the prosecution story and turned hostile. Co-accused Sourabh Mishra has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 16/06/2022 passed in M.Cr.C.No.23475/2022, so on the ground of parity also the applicant is entitled for grant of bail. The applicant has no criminal past. 9. He has been in custody since 15.07.2020. Charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that earlier bail applications of the applicant were dismissed on merits, thereafter there has been no change in circumstances, so he should not be released on bail. 11. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the statements of both the independent witnesses of the seizure memo Sanjay Gupta (PW-1) and Sahil Gupta (PW-2) have been recorded by the trial Court, so there is no apprehension of tempering with the prosecution evidence by the applicant on releasing him on bail, co-accused Sourabh Mishra has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 16/06/2022 passed in M.Cr.C.No.23475/2022, applicant is in custody since 15.07.2020, charge-sheet has been filed and trial is still pending, 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 surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned CJM/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial. 12. 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 acCuainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court; 4. 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 acCuainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court; 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. 13. C.C. on payment of usual charges.