Deepak Dhurvey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1424 MP

                                                                        1                                MCRC-8772-2021
                                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                        MCRC-8772-2021
                                                       (DEEPAK DHURVEY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                      Jabalpur, Dated : 08-04-2021
                                            Shri Himanshu Mishra, counsel for the applicant.

                                            Shri Pradeep Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for modification of the order dated 27.08.2019 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.

No.33461/2019.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that earlier the applicant had filed an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail, which was registered as M.Cr.C.No.33461/2019 and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 27.08.2019 with the condition of depositing a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- in a fixed deposit in any nationalized bank. He further submitted that the applicant is a poor person and he is not in a position to deposit the alleged amount, due to which he is still in custody. So the condition imposed by this Court of depositing the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-

in fixed deposit be relaxed. In this regard, learned counsel of the applicant also placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Apex Court in the case of Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another reported in (2020) 10 SCC 77 and Dilip Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another reported in (2021) 2 SCC 779.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer. The facts of the cases Parvez Noordin Lokhandwalla Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another and Dilip Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another (Supra) as relied upon by the learned counsel of the applicant do not match with the present case. In this case, the applicant himself gave the proposal that he is ready to deposit the amount Rs.3,00,000/- under protest and on the proposal of the applicant this court imposed the impugned Signature Not Verified SAN condition, so, these judgments do not assist the applicant.

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2021.04.09 15:35:17 IST 2 MCRC-8772-2021 Condition of depositing Rs.3,00,000/- was imposed by the court on the proposal given by the counsel of the applicant. So, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to modify the order dated 27.08.2019 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.33461/2019.

Accordingly, M.Cr.C. is rejected.

However it appears from the record that the applicant is in custody since 31.07.2019 while the trial is still pending so it is expected from the trial court to dispose of the case as early as possible preferably within six month from the receiving of the copy of this order.

Office is directed to send the copy of this order to the trial court for necessary compliance.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

(ra)

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2021.04.09 15:35:17 IST