Madhya Pradesh High Court
Naved vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 September, 2021
Author: Rohit Arya
1 MCRC-42191-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-42191-2021
(NAVED Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Indore, Dated : 17-09-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri A.S.Garg, learned senior counsel with Ms. Poorva
Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Neeraj Gaur, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
Heard through Video Conferencing.
This is the third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed
o n behalf of the applicant. The applicant is in custody since
09.08.2019 in connection with Crime No. 308/2019 registered at
P.S., Tarana, District Ujjain for the offence punishable under Sections
302, 147, 148, 149, 294 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. His
first and second applications have been dismissed as withdrawn vide
orders dated 08.02.2021 and 13.05.2021 in M.Cr.C.No.50597/2020
and M.Cr.C.No.20018/2021.
As per prosecution story, while the deceased Javed and injured
Adil were going on motorcycle near Jhanda Chowk, Tarana, the
present applicant alongwith the co-accused Gabbar, Saeed and Asif
came on the spot and Asif hit Javed with wooden stick on the left
hand, Saeed hit Javed on his head by sword causing deep wound.
Javed fell down on the street. Accused Gabbar caused stab injury over
knee and thereafter applicant alongwith Harshad also came on the
spot and caused multiple stab injuries on the body of the deceased.
Thereafter they fled away. The deceased was rushed to the hospital,
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
where he died having suffered cardiac vascular failure due to multiple
SAN REENA JOSEPH
Date: 2021.09.17
18:23:12 IST
2 MCRC-42191-2021
injuries caused on his body. Accordingly case has been registered.
Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that applicant
is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Investigation is complete
and challan has been filed. Though challan has been filed, hence, no
more custodial interrogation is required. Though charges have been
framed, but no prosecution witnesses have been examined therefore,
the applicant cannot be left at the mercy of the complainant and the
prosecution witnesses. The applicant is languishing in jail since
09.08.2019. Moreso, looking to prevailing Covid-19 situation, trial
is not likely to conclude early in the near future. Hence, relying upon
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sudhir Kumar
Kad Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation AIR 2021 SC 2614 prays
for enlargement on bail on such terms and conditions this Court
deems fit and proper.
Learned Panel Lawyer opposes the application supporting the
order impugned with the submission that its a case of commission of
murder with common intention by accused persons. There are as many
as six injuries on the body of the deceased Javed, one on head and
other on the vital parts of the body, which resulted into his death. The
applicant is named in the FIR and an overt act has been attributed to
him. As such, it is case of common intention to commit murder. That
apart, MLC report confirms grievous injuries caused to the deceased
including the one on the occipital region resulting into the death of
the deceased. Hence, no indulgence is warranted in the matter of grant
of bail to the applicant.
Upon hearing counsel for the parties though this Court refrains
from commenting upon the merits of the case, but prima facie it is a
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN REENA JOSEPH
Date: 2021.09.17
18:23:12 IST
3 MCRC-42191-2021
c a s e where all accused persons with common intention have
committed murder of deceased Javed at public place with sword,
knife, wooden stick etc. causing multiple injuries. The verbal
contention about the delay in trial itself cannot be a ground for
enlargement on bail, in the obtaining facts and circumstances. The
judgment relied upon by the learned senior counsel is distinguishable
on facts and is of no assistance, regard being had to the nature of
gravity of offence committed. This Court declines to accede to the
prayer for enlargement on bail.
Consequently, the bail application stands rejected.
(ROHIT ARYA)
JUDGE
RJ
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN REENA JOSEPH
Date: 2021.09.17
18:23:12 IST
