JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH) v. (BY SHRI G.P. SINGH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
Case at a glance
- Bench
- VIVEK AGARWAL
Outcome
Allowed
application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 437(3), 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 394, 450
- Arms Act, 1959 ss. 25, 27
Judgment
(BY SHRI SANDESH DIXIT, ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION MADAN MAHAL DISTRICT JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH) .....APPLICANTS (BY SHRI G.P. SINGH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) .....RESPONDENTS This second bail application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: ORDER This second bail application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicants, who are in custody since
09.03.2022 in connection with Crime No.106/2022 registered at Police Station Madan Mahal, District Jabalpur (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 450, 394, 34 of IPC read with Section 25, 27 of Arms Act. First bail application filed on behalf of the applicants was dismissed as Signature Not Verified SAN 2 withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer after eye witnesses are examined before the Court of law vide order dated 09.05.2022 in M.Cr.C. No.15643 of
Operative part
2022. It is submitted that complainant Santosh Kumar Mahawat, PW-1, his son Suraj Mahawat, nephew Sunni and Gaurav have been examined in the Court of law and they have not supported the prosecution case. They have not identified the present applicants. It is further submitted that the applicants are in custody since 09.03.2022. Trial will take considerable time for its conclusion There is no criminal history of the applicants. Hence, prayer is made to enlarge him on bail. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent-State opposed the prayer for grant of bail. However, he admits that there is no criminal history of the applicants. Taking all these facts into consideration and the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicants and trial will take considerable time for its conclusion, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this second bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicants Sajjad Akhtar Jaidi and Zuber Khan be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousands only) with two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court for their appearance before the said Court on the dates given by the concerned Court during pendency of trial. It is further directed that the applicants shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. Signature Not Verified SAN This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become ineffective. 3 Certified copy as per rules. Tabish (VIVEK AGARWAL) 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: application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 437(3), 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 394, 450; Arms Act, 1959 — ss. 25, 27.
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.