Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ansar Mohammad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 November, 2021
Author: Atul Sreedharan
1 CRA-2775-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 2775 of 2021
(ANSAR MOHAMMAD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 10-11-2021
Mr.Pradeep Kumar Naveria, learned counsel for the appellant.
Mr.Manhar Dixit, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.6461/2021, which is an application for suspension
of sentence and grant of bail.
T h e case of the prosecution is that the appellant is one of three
accused persons who have committed the murder of the deceased. The
deceased is the driver of a Bolero Jeep. On the date of the incident, PW-12,
who is an eye witness to the circumstance preceding the murder, states that
three persons were on foot and started assaulting the driver and bundled him
into the Bolero vehicle and took him away. He further states that on account
of darkness, he could not identify the persons. The PW-13 is the owner of
the Bolero vehicle and also the employer of the deceased-driver, he has also
stated that he is an eye witness but he has been disbelieved by the learned trial
Court as DW-12 states that he had hired the vehicle from PW-13 and after
witnessing the incident he informed PW-13 by mobile and it is only thereafter
that he came to the scene of occurrence, therefore, the learned trial Court has
held that he is a witness to the subsequent events and not to the incident of
abduction itself. Learned counsel for the State while opposing the application
for grant of bail and suspension of sentence has drawn the attention of this
Court to paragraphs-92 and 93. As regards the appellant herein, learned trial
Court has held that the allegations proved against the appellant herein in
pagaraph-92 of its judgment that the guilt against the appellant is proved
beyond reasonable doubt only on the basis of the articles which were seized
from him, which included an Axe and a shirt, which had human blood.
Learned counsel for the appellant on the other hand has submitted that
Signature Not Verified
SAN
the observation of the learned trial Court in paragraph-93 is a very frail kind of
Digitally signed by RAVIKANT KEWAT
Date: 2021.11.11 12:49:49 IST
2 CRA-2775-2021
evidence and that the same by itself is grossly inadequate to hold the appellant
guilty in the said crime. He has further submitted that the appellant was on bail
during the course of the trial.
Be that as it may, on a prima-facie appreciation of the facts of the case
and without commenting upon the merits of the case, I.A.No.6461/2021 is
allowed it is directed that the appellant shall be enlarged on bail upon his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand
Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Court.
The jail authorities shall have the appellant checked by the jail doctor to
ensure that he is not suffering from the coronavirus and if he is, he shall be
sent to the nearest hospital designated by the state for treatment. If not, he
shall be transported to his place of residence by the jail authorities.
C.C. as per rules.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) (SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE JUDGE
rk.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by RAVIKANT KEWAT
Date: 2021.11.11 12:49:49 IST
