(BY SHRI RAHUL KUMAR TRIPATHI, ADVOCATE) v. (BY SHRI GOPAL JAISWAL, PANEL LAWYER)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 302
Judgment
(BY SHRI GOPAL JAISWAL, PANEL LAWYER) .....RESPONDENT This M.Cr.C. coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: Heard with the aid of case diary. ORDER This is the second application under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant Shailesh @ Handi was arrested on 07/10/2020 in connection with Crime No.672/2020 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Balaghat (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. The earlier bail application filed by applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25/08/2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.43663/2020. A s per prosecution case, on 01/10/2022 at around 01:30-02:00 A.M. deceased Manish and Sanju Matre & Dilip Matre were drinking liquor. All of a sudden a quarrel took place between applicant Shailesh and deceased Manish. In the incident applicant assaulted deceased by kicks and fists, due to which deceased Manish sustained injury and died.
Signature Not Verified SAN Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. There is no evidence on record to show that 2 the applicant assaulted deceased Manish with intent to kill him. Even in the postmortem report of deceased it is mentioned that no external injury was found on his body. Deceased died due to rupture of spleen, so it cannot be said that the applicant murdered deceased. Even statement of both the eyewitnesses of the incident i.e. Dilip Matre (PW-1) and Sanju Matre (PW-5) have been recorded by the trial Court. They also admitted that due to some dispute quarrel took place between applicant and deceased Manish. The applicant has been in custody since 07/10/2020, 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 State opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicant assaulted deceased Manish, due to which he sustained injury and died.
Operative part
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the contention of learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that the statement of both the eyewitnesses of the incident i.e. Dilip Matre (PW-1) and Sanju Matre (PW-5) 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, the applicant is in custody since 07/10/2020, while trial is still pending and 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 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. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
The applicant will cooperate in the trial; Signature Not Verified SAN
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;
The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused; 3
The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial C.C. on payment of usual charges. Court. (RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified SAN SAN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.