Manoj Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 5162 MP

                  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
             1                                 M.Cr.C.No. 38083/2021
                   (Manoj Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. )

Gwalior Bench:
Dated -08/09/2021
     Shri Susheel Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant.
      Shri       Dheeraj   Budholiya,    learned    PL     for   the
respondent/State.

Heard.

Perused the case diary.

The applicant has filed this repeat bail application u/S.439

Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on

24/12/2020 by Police Station Kotwali., District Datia in

connection with Crime No. 499/2020 registered for offence

punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 484, 485, 486, 471, 474

of IPC, Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act and Section 130(3) and

177 of Motor Vehicles Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant

has been falsely implicated in the matter and he is suffering

confinement since 24/12/2020 and charge-sheet has already been

filed. Looking to the long period of custody and the fact that no

custodial interrogation is required, his case be considered for bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant fairly submits that he bears

record of 7-8 criminal cases out of which in 3 cases, acquittal has

been recorded in his favour and 4-5 cases are pending and in all

those cases, he has been bailed out. A chance be given for course HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Manoj Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. )

correction and to reform himself. He further undertakes not to

involve in any criminal activity in future. Confinement amount to

pretrial detention. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in trial. He

further undertakes to serve the environment/national/social cause

voluntarily by planting saplings, to purge his misdeeds, if any.

On these grounds, prayer for bail is made out.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the

basis of criminal record of applicant and prayed for dismissal of

the application.

Heard.

Considering the submissions and facts and circumstances

of the case, especially long period of custody and the fact that a

chance be given to applicant for course correction and to reform

himself to purge his misdeeds, if any, as per judgment of this

Court in the matter of Sunita Gandharva Vs. State of M.P.

reported in 2020 (3) MPLJ(Cri.)247, the application deserves to

be allowed and therefore, without expressing any opinion on

merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this application

but with certain stringent conditions. It is hereby directed that on

furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand

Only) with two solvent sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Manoj Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. )

satisfaction of trial Court applicant shall be released on bail.

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

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

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

3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

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

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

7. The applicant shall mark his presence before the concerned Police Station on every Sunday of month between 10.30 am to 1.30 pm till conclusion of trial; and 8- ,rn~ }kjk muds vfHkHkk"kd }kjk nh xbZ opu ds vuqlkj ;g Hkh ;g funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkosnd 05 ikS/kksa dk ¼ Qy nsus okys isM+ vFkok [email protected]½ jksi.k djsxk rFkk mls vius vkl iMksl esa isM+ksa dh lqj{kk ds fy, ckM+ yxkus dh O;oLFkk djuh gksxh rkfd ikS/ks lqjf{kr jg ldsA vkosnd dk ;g drZO; gS fd u dsoy ikS/kksa dks yxk;k tk,s] cfYd mUgsa iks"k.k Hkh fn;k tk,A ^^o`{kkjksi.k ds lkFk] o`{kkiks"k.k Hkh vko';d gSA^^ 9- vkosnd fo'ks"kr% 6&8 QhV ÅWaps ikS/[email protected]+ksa dks yxk;sxk rkfd os 'kh?kz gh iw.kZ fodflr gks ldsaA vuqikyu lqfuf'pr djus ds fy,] vkosnd dks fjgk fd;s tkus dh fnukad ls 30 fnuksa ds Hkhrj lacaf/kr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k o`{[email protected]/kksa ds jksi.k ds lHkh QksVks çLrqr djuk gksxsaA rRi'pkr~] fopkj.k ds HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

(Manoj Kushwah Vs. State of M.P. )

lekiu rd gj rhu eghus esa vkosnd ds }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k izxfr fjiksVZ çLrqr dh tk,xh A 10- o`{kksa dh çxfr ij fuxjkuh j[kuk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk drZO; gS D;ksafd i;kZoj.k {kj.k ds dkj.k ekuo vfLrRo nkao ij gS vkSj U;k;ky; vuqikyu ds ckjs esa vkosnd }kjk fn[kkbZ xbZ fdlh Hkh ykijokgh dks utj vankt ugh dj ldrk gSA blfy, vkosnd dks isM+ksa dh çxfr vkSj vkosnd }kjk vuqikyu ds laca/k esa ,d fjiksVZ çLrqr djus ds fy, funZsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa vkonsd }kjk fd;s x;s vuqikyu dh ,d la{kfIr fjiskVZ bl U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rhu ekg esa ¼vxys N% eghuksa ds fy,½ j[kh tk;sxh ftls fd ^^funsZ'k ^^ 'kh"kZ ds varxZr j[kk tk,xkA 11- o`{kkjksi.k esa ;k isM+ksa dh ns[kHkky esa vkosnd dh vksj ls dh xbZ dksbZ Hkh pwd vkosnd dks tekur dk ykHk ysus ls oafpr dj ldrh gSA 12- vkosnd dks viuh ilan ds LFkku ij bu ikS/[email protected] dks jksius dh Lora=rk gksxh] ;fn og bu jksis x;s isMksa dh Vªh xkMZ ;k ckM+ yxkdj j{kk djuk pkgrk gS] vU;Fkk vkosnd dks o`{kksa ds jksi.k ds fy, rFkk muds lqj{kk mik;ksa ds fy, vko';d [kpsZ ogu djuk gksxsaA 13- bl U;k;ky; }kjk ;g funsZ'k ,d ijh{k.k izdj.k ds rkSj ij fn, x, gSa rkfd fgalk vkSj cqjkbZ ds fopkj dk izfrdkj] l`tu ,oa izd`fr ds lkFk ,dkdkj gksus ds ek/;e ls lkeaktL; LFkkfir fd;k tk ldsA orZeku esa ekuo vfLrRo ds vko';d vax ds :i esa n;k] lsok] izse ,oaa d:a.kk dh izd`fr dks fodflr djus dh vko';drk gS D;ksafd ;g ekuo thou dh ewyHkwr izo`fr;ka gSa vkSj ekuo vfLrRo dks cuk, j[kus ds fy, budk iquthZfor gksuk vko';d gSA 14- ;g funsZ'k vkosnd ds }kjk Lor% O;Dr dh xbZ lkeqnkf;d lsok dh bPNk ds dkj.k fn;k x;k gS tks LoSfPNd gSA 15- ^^;g iz;kl dsoy ,d o`{k ds jksi.k dk iz'u u gksdj cfYd ,d fopkj ds vadqj.k dk gSA^^

16. It is expected from the applicant that he shall submit photographs by downloading the mobile application (App) prepared at the instance of High Court for monitoring the plantation through satellite / Geo-tagging.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

E-Copy/Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance from the office of this Court.

E copy/Certified copy as per rules/directions.

(Anand Pathak) Judge jps/-

JAI Digitally signed by JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH

PRAKASH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=287738d30aabaeda9b10cecdf1

SOLANKI 79cec865c7633f4cfb9e38ce14fcbb05b9 522a, cn=JAI PRAKASH SOLANKI Date: 2021.09.09 10:09:57 +05'30'