Sourabh Singh Tomar vs The State Of M.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 3732 MP

                                                                     1                             MCRC-29731-2021
                                          The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                    MCRC-29731-2021
                                                      (SOURABH SINGH TOMAR Vs THE STATE OF M.P.)


                                  Jabalpur, Dated : 30-07-2021
                                         Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                         Shri Siddharth Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
                                         Shri Sunil Gupta, learned P.L. for the respondent-State.

Status report has been received, in which it is mentioned that statements of as many as 25 prosecution witnesses have been recorded by

the trial Court.

Case diary perused.

This is fifth application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant Saurabh Singh Tomar was arrested on 27/06/2017 in connection with Crime No.199/2017 registered at Police Station Maharajpur, District Mandla for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 397, 412 of the I.P.C.

First and second bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merit by this Court vide orders dated 12/03/2018 & 19/09/2018 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.6263/2018 & 19/09/2018 and third and fourth applications were

dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 20/03/2019 & 05/12/2020 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.9783/2019 & 15632/2020.

As per the prosecution case on 08/06/2017 complainant Santosh Soni was coming back to Mandla along with his father Suresh Soni by Alto Car bearing registration No.MP/20-CC-0859. On the way at Vidhi Ghati near Hanuman Temple, applicant and co-accused persons namely Harendra Singh Rajput, Vishu, Bashant Kumar Bairagi, Umesh Yadav, Kamal Ojha, Suraj Yadav and Rajkumar assaulted the complainant and looted silver ornaments weighing 36 kgs and gold ornaments weighing 250 gram and cash worth Rs.60,000/-. Total property worth Rs.19,50,000/-.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. Although, earlier bail Signature Not Verified SAN applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merit, but the applicant Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.07.30 17:41:34 IST 2 MCRC-29731-2021 is in custody since 27/06/2017 and the trial is still pending, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that earlier bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merit, thereafter there is no change in circumstance, so he should not be released on

bail.

First and second bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed on merit by this Court vide orders dated 12/03/2018 & 19/09/2018 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.6263/2018 & 19/09/2018 and third and fourth applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 20/03/2019 & 05/12/2020 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.9783/2019 & 15632/2020 and since then there is no change in circumstance, except custody period. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu Yadav Vs. CBI Through its Director, (2007) 1 SCC 70 held that bail, cannot be granted solely on the ground of long detention in jail and inability of accused to conduct the defence. Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. v. Kajad, (2001) 7 SCC 673 observed "It is true that successive bail applications are permissible under the changed circumstances. But without the change in the circumstances, the second application would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier judgment which is not permissible under criminal law as has been held by this Court in Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa [(2001) 1 SCC 169 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 113] and various other judgments."

Looking to the fact and circumstance of the case and as to the fact that the complainant has identified the applicant in test identification parade and some of the looted property has been seized from the possession of the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, M.Cr.C. is rejected.

However, it appears from the record that applicant is in custody since 27/06/2017 and trial is still pending, so it is expected from the learned trial

Signature Not Verified SAN Court to dispose of the case as early as possible preferably within a period of

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.07.30 17:41:34 IST 3 MCRC-29731-2021 six months from the date of receipt of copy of this Court.

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned trial Court f o r necessary compliance. Learned trial Court is also directed to send progress report of the trial every month to the Principal Registrar (Vigilence).

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

as

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.07.30 17:41:34 IST