Ajay Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.No.4891/2018
(Ajay Prajapati Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh)

Jabalpur Dated :14/02/2018
Mr.Anurag Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr.A.K.Sharma, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent-state.

Heard.

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the
applicants under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

The applicant is in custody since 23/01/2018 in
connection with Crime No.60/2018, registered at Police
Station-Station Ranjhi District Jabalpur(M.P.) for the offences
punishable under section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act.

It is alleged that 54 bulk litres illicit liquor has been
seized from the possession of the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that
applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this case. It is further submitted that the offence is triable by
Judicial Magistrate, First Class and trial will take long time to
conclude. He is ready to furnish bail as per the order,
abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these
grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of
bail to the applicant.

Per-contra, Government Advocate for the respondent-
State opposes the bail application.

After hearing arguments of the parties and looking to
the facts and circumstances of the case, despite bar under
Section 59-A(ii) of the M.P. Excise Act and in view of the law
laid down in Banshi Lal Vs. State of M.P., [2003(2)
MPLJ 369], I am of the considered view that it would be
appropriate to release the applicant on bail, therefore,
without commenting on the merits of the case, application of
the present applicant namely, Ajay Prajapati under
Section
439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it
is hereby allowed.

It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on
his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees
Thirty Thousand) with one surety of the same amount, to
the satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or CJM for his
appearance before them on the dates given by the
concerned Court. It is directed that applicant shall comply
the provisions of
Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.

(H.P. Singh)
JUDGE
s/-

SUSHMA KUSHWAHA
2018.02.14 18:37:36 +05’30’
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.Rev.No.423/2018
(Ambika Prasad Choubey Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh )

Jabalpur Dated :06/02/2018
Mr.Arvind Chawla, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
Mr.Amit Kumar Sharma, learned Government Advocate
for the respondent-State.

Record of Trial Court be called for.
Admit.

Heard on I.A.No.1544/2018, an application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the petitioner.

Petitioner stands convicted for an offence punishable
under
Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced to undergo RI for
three months and fine of Rs.71,000/-.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there
is fair chance to succeed in the case. Final hearing of this
revision will take time. If the petitioner is not released on
bail, his purpose of filing this revision will be frustrated.
Therefore, the application filed on behalf of the petitioner be
allowed and the period of his remaining jail sentence be
suspended and he be relased on bail.

After hearing rival submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the
case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on
bail and suspend the sentence awarded to him subject to
deposit of 50% of fine amount of Rs.71,000/- including the
amount already deposited i.e Rs.17,750/-
Consequently, I.A.No.1544/2018, is allowed. The
sentence awarded to the petitioner shall remain suspended
during the pendency of this Revision. Petitioner Ambika
Prasad Choubey, be enlarged on bail subject to deposit of
50% of fine amount of Rs.71,000/- including the amount
already deposited i.e Rs.17,750/- and on furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of trial Court. It is further directed that the
petitioner shall appear and mark his presence before the
Registry of this Court on 12/07/2018 and shall continue to
do so on all such future dates as may be given in this behalf,
during pendency of the matter. It is made clear that
List the Revision for final hearing in due course of time
at its own turn.

Certified copy as per rules.

(H.P. Singh)
JUDGE
s/-

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.A.No.284/2018
(Ajim Khan Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh another)

Jabalpur Dated :06/02/2018
Shri P.S.Chouhan, learned counsel for the
appellant.

Shri Akhilendra Singh, learned Government
Advocate for the respondent-state.

Shri Ashish Tiwari, learned counsel for the
respondent no.2.

Heard.

This criminal appeal has been filed on behalf of
the appellant under Section 14-A of the SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, being aggrieved
by the order dated 03/01/2018 passed by Special
Judge(Atrocities), District Betul by which, bail
application under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C on behalf of
the appellant has been dismissed.

The appellant is in custody since 30/12/2017, in
connection with Crime No.1056/2017, registered at
Police Station Kotwali, Betul District Betul (M.P.) for the
offence punishable under
Sections 376(2)(N) of IPC
and Section 3(1)(B)(i), 3(2)(5) of SC/ST(Prevention of
Atrocities Act), 1989.

As per prosecution, complainant is the member
of SC while appellant is not the mbmer of SC/ST.
Appellant and prosecutrix are known to each other.

They came in the contact before three years ago from
the date of report i.e 28/12/2017. It is alleged that on
the promise of marriage appellant used to commit
rape upon the prosecutrix but later on he refused to
marry her. Thereafter, prosecutrix herself did not
want to maintain the relation with the appellant but
inspite of this before two weeks of lodging report
appellant by threateing called her in back side of his
own house and committed rape upon her. Thereafter,
on her report case was registered against the
appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is an innocent person and he has been
falsely implicated in this case. Prosecutrix is a major
girl. She is consented party. Charge sheet has been
filed and conclusion of trial will take time. There is no
criminal antecedents against the appellant. On these
grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays for
grant of bail to the appellant.

Per-contra, learned Government Advocate
opposes the bail application of the appellant.

After hearing arguments of the parties and
looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, in
my opinion, it would be appropriate to release the
appellant on bail, therefore, without commenting on
the merits of the case, appeal of the present
appellant, namely, Ajim Khan under Section 14-A of
the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 seems to
be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that the appellant be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one
surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the
trial Court.

Certified copy as per rules.

(H.P. SINGH)
JUDGE
s/-

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.No.4327/2018
(Siddhant Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh)

Jabalpur Dated :06/02/2018
Mr.M.K.Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr.A.S.Pathak, learned Government Advocate for the
respondent-state.

Heard.

This is first bail application filed on behalf of the
applicant under
Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

The applicant is in custody since 04/11/2017 in
connection with Crime No.565/2017, registered at Police
Station Shahpur District Burhanpur (M.P.) for the offences
punishable under
section 363,366,344,420 and 376(2)n of IPC.

As per prosecution, before three months from
03/11/2017, prosecutrix came in contact with applicant
Siddhant. When she was traveling in an auto-rickshaw,
applicant introduced himself as driver and informed that he
can provide job and if she is interested in job, then she may
contact with applicant, who is known to him. Thereafter, she
with co-accused Shobha Bai reached Muktai Nagar where at
bus-stand applicant met her, he took her in a rest house and
committed rape upon her. At that time, co-accused Shobha Bai
was standing outside the rest house. Thereafter, again on
02/11/2017, she further reached Muktai Nagar, then co-
accused Siddhant took her to Malkapur, kept in a house and
committed rape upon her. On 03/11/2017, police came there
and took applicant in custody. Thereafter, on the report of the
prosecutrix, case has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant
is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
further submitted that co-accused has already been released
on bail. Charge sheet has been filed. There is no criminal
antecedents against the applicant. He is ready to furnish bail
as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the
Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant
prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Per-contra, Government Advocate for the respondent-
State opposes the bail application.

After hearing arguments of the parties and looking to the
facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered
view that it would be appropriate to release the applicant on
bail, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case,
application of the present applicant namely, Siddhant under
Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable.
Consequently, it is hereby allowed.

It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his
furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty
Thousand) with one surety of the same amount, to the
satisfaction of the JMFC concerned or CJM for his appearance
before them on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is
directed that applicant shall comply the provisions of
Section
437(3) of Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules today.

(H.P. SINGH)
JUDGE
s/-

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *