Jawed Tauhit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2222 MP

         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       M.Cr.C. No.14230/2021
                  (Jawed Tauhit Vs. State of M.P. )
                                                                      1

Jabalpur, Dated : 09/ 06/ 2021
         Heard through video conferencing.
         Shri S.A. Wakil, learned counsel for the applicant.
         Shri Pradeep Gupta, G.A. for the respondent / State.

This is the second application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. Applicant Jawed Tauhit was arrested on 12.08.2020 in Crime No. 523/2020 registered at Police Station Gohalpur, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 09.12.2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.39901/2020.

As per the prosecution case, 11.08.2020 when complainant was going from Malviya Chouk to Charkhamba on the way near Boodimai Khermai applicant meet him and looted one mobile phone from the possession of complainant on the point of knife.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 12.08.2020 and the conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that 8 other offences are also registered against the applicant, so he should not be released on bail.

Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 19.12.2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.39901/2020 and thereafter there is no change in circumstance except custody period of the applicant. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu Yadav v. CBI Through THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.14230/2021 (Jawed Tauhit Vs. State of M.P. )

its Director, (2007) 1 SCC 70 held that bail, cannot be granted solely on the ground of long incarnation 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 allegation that applicant looted one mobile phone from the possession of complainant on the point of knife and he has criminal past, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Hence the M.Cr.C. is rejected.

                                                     (Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
sarathe                                                    Judge




          Digitally signed
          by NAVEEN
          KUMAR
          SARATHE
          Date:
          2021.06.09
          16:54:13 +05'30'