AJAY YADAV v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 2024-02-02. AJAY YADAV v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA nd ON THE 2 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2930 of 2024 BETWEEN:- AJAY YADAV S/O SHRI RAJKUMAR YADAV, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O VASUNDHARA COLONY MALHARA ROAD P. S. KEWLARI DISTRICT SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... APPLICANT (BY SHRI VISHAL VINCENT RAJENDRA DANIEL - ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE S TAT I O N KEWLARI DISTRICT SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... RESPONDENT (BY SHRI C. K. MISHRA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: ORDER This is second application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of bail filed on behalf of the applicant who has been arrested relating to FIR/Crime No. 587/2022 dated 15. 11.
2022 registered at Police Station Kewlari, district Seoni, for an offence punishable under Section 408, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B, 587 of IPC and Section 66 of I. T. Act. His first application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 25. 08. 2023 under M. Cr. C. No. 30426/2023. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is innocent and has Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K Signing time: 2/3/2024 12:31:05 PM falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that the applicant is in custody since 27. 11. 2022 and the trial will take considerable time to conclude. The applicant is the permanent resident of district and there is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with prosecution evidence. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the conditions to be imposed by the Court. Upon these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 3.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5. This bail application has been argued on the ground that on account of long period of custody and prospective delay in trial, the Apex Court has granted bail to the co-accused Lalit Saryam in SLP (CRL) No. 12874/2023 on 16. 01. 2024. According to applicant, he too is in custody for almost similar period and was charge-sheeted along with the co-accused Lalit Sariyam, therefore, his case is at par with the co-accused Lalit Sariyam. Although, the earlier bail application was dismissed under M. Cr. C. No. 30426/2023, but it is now argued that applicant had lesser amount credited in his bank account as compared to Lalit Saryam and on the parameters of period of custody and prospective delay in trial, his case is identical to the case of Lalit Saryam, therefore parity is prayed for. 6.
Having considered these facts, this Court deems it fit to release the applicant on bail, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this repeat application is allowed. 7. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K Signing time: 2/3/2024 12:31:05 PM of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the said Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of the trial. 8. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Cr. P. C. 9. Accordingly, this M. Cr. C. stands allowed and disposed of. (ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE DevS Signature Not Verified Signed by: DEVESH K Signing time: 2/3/2024 12:31:05 PM
Source: High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.