Mangu @ Mangalsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1686 MP

                                                                  1
                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                                                                 BEFORE
                                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                                       ON THE 7th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                                                 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 60405 of 2021

                                           Between:-
                                           MANGU @ MANGALSINGH S/O SHRI BHARAT
                                           BHEEL,    AGED   ABOUT   25   YEARS,
                                           OCCUPATION: LABOR,
                                           R/O GRAM MALGAON SANAWAD,
                                           DISTRICT- KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                              .....APPLICANT
                                           (BY SHRI DHARMENDRA GURJAR, ADVOCATE)

                                           AND

                                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                           HOUSE OFFICER THR. P.S. KHUDEL, DISTRICT
                                           INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....RESPONDENT
                                           (BY SHRI SANJAY KARANGEWALA, GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                                    (Heard through Video Conferencing)
                                      Th is appeal coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
                                following:
                                                                  ORDER

01. This is the second application under Section 439 of Criminal

Procedure Code, 1973. The applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.388/2016 registered at Police Station Khudel, District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant is in custody since 29.07.2017.

02. First application of the applicant bearing M.Cr.C. No.35168 of 2021 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 17.09.2021 with a liberty to renew the prayer in case the eye witness Jorabai is not examined.

03. Counsel for the applicant submits that the said witness Jorabai has not been examined by the prosecution and has in fact been given up as a witness.

04. The allegation against the applicant is that Jorabai was living with Signature Not Verified SAN the applicant along with her two minor daughters. On 02.11.2016 at about Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2022.02.08 10:40:12 IST

9:00 pm, the applicant beat Bhuri, daughter of Jorabai on being angered with her not studying. On 03.11.2016 at about 7:00 am Bhuri was found dead after which report was promptly filed and investigation was commenced during the course of which the applicant has been implicated and arrested in the present offence.

05. Counsel for the applicant submits that from statements of witnesses recorded before the trial Court, the guilt of the applicant has not been established. There is no eye-witness to the incident. All the witnesses examined before the Court are only hearsay witnesses and from the statements of said witnesses the applicant cannot be convicted. It is further submitted that the main witness of the case i.e Jorabai has been given up by the prosecution itself and has not been examined in the Court hence there is a very slim chance of conviction of the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has already remained in custody for a period of more than four years and six months. On the such grounds, prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.

06. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the allegations levelled against the applicant and the material collected by the prosecution against him, he is not entitled to be released on bail only on the basis of statements of witnesses recorded before the Court below.

07. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary. The statements of witnesses which have been recorded before the trial Court are a matter of appreciation and shall be taken into consideration by the Court at the time of passing of the final judgment. The report in the case has promptly been made and recovery has also been made from the applicant. He is stated to have been living with Jorabai along with her two daughters at the time of the incident and had gone absconding on the very next day of the alleged offence. Only on the basis of statements of

Signature Not Verified witnesses, in view of other material available on record against him, it cannot SAN

Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2022.02.08 10:40:12 IST

be said that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail to him. Moreover, the record shows that prosecution has closed its case and the trial itself shall be concluded shortly. Consequently, I do not find merit in the application and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE jyoti

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2022.02.08 10:40:12 IST