MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Prolonged pre-trial detention is an anathema to the concept of liberty; bail granted

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mcrc. 8042/19

Dileep Pardi

Vs.

State of M.P. )

Gwalior Dt. 6/3/2019

Shri Alok Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Dwivedi, Public Prosecutor for the State.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
Case-diary is perused.

The petitioner has filed this fourth repeat application u/S. 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail after rejection of earlier ones on merits and by granting liberty to come again on examination of principal PWs.

The petitioner has been arrested on 10/11/2017 by Police Station Dharnavda, District Guna (M.P.) in connection with Crime No. 244/16, registered in relation to the offence punishable u/S 307, 323, 294, 147, 148, 149, 325, 427 IPC and Sec. 25/27 of the Arms Act.

Petitioner is alleged with attempt to murder where several police personnel have sustained injuries on account of unlawful act of the petitioner and other co-accused including Garaj Pardi who has since been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 30/11/2018 in Mcrc. 46185/18.

The allegation against the petitioner is of wielding a lathi and causing injury. The Trial is not progressing despite the petitioner is in custody since 1 year and 4 months. Charge has been framed long back and no PW has come forth to be examined.

However the petitioner has large number of offences including offence of attempt to murder for which there is no explanation.

Considering the aforesaid and the fact that similarly placed co- accused Garaj has since been enlarged on bail and further looking to the period of custody of the petitioner fundamental right to speedy trial under Art. 21 of the Constitution seems to be breached.

READ  SC: Registered document is presumed to be genuine; onus to prove otherwise is on person who challenges it

In view of the above and that trial is not likely to conclude in the near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this court though is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the petitioner but with certain stringent conditions in view of criminal antecedents.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only) with one solvent surety each of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the petitioner :-

1.The petitioner will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The petitioner will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The petitioner will not indulge himself 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 petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The petitioner will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The petitioner will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The petitioner will mark his presence before the concerned trial court once every week till conclusion of trial. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.

READ  Whether delay in delivery of reasoned Judgment violates Article 21 of the Constitution?

C.c. as per rules.

(Sheel Nagu) Judge (Bu) Digitally signed by DHANANJAYA BUCHAKE DHANAN

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 MyNation KnowledgeBase
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

READ  Wife is not entitled to maintenance who has deserted her husband,
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation