VINOD v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 2024-01-09. VINOD v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV th ON THE 9 OF JANUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56571 of 2023 BETWEEN:- VINOD S/O POORAN SINGH AHIRWAR, AGED 21 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOURER, R/O SAWAN KHEDI, TEHSIL LATERI, DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... APPLICANT (BY SHRI DEEPAK SHRIVASTAV - ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION SHAMSHABAD, DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... RESPONDENT (BY SHRI PRABHAT PATERIYA - DY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: ORDER This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr. P. C. for grant of bail relating to Crime No. 284 of 2023 registered at Police Station Shamshabad, District Vidisha (M. P. ) for the offence under Sections 420, 34 of IPC and 66C of I. T. Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant/accused argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since 15. 08. 2023. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, his custodial interrogation is not required any more. Further submission is that there is no evidence against the present applicant/accused in respect to connection with the crime. He is permanent resident of District Vidisha (M. P. ). and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. He shall abide by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court upon him. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. O n the other hand, learned Dy. Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State vehemently opposed the application by citing criminal history and prayed for its rejection. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and 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 solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.. 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/her; 2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be; 3) The applicant will not indulge himself/herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be; 4 ) The applicant will not commit any other offence or will not repeat the offence in future.
In case, if he/she is found involving in the o ffe nc e of same nature, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench; 5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be. Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action. E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court. Certified copy as per rules. (SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE AK/- ANAND KUMAR 2024. 01. 10 14:52:50 +05'30'
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.