Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajnikant @ Laxminarayan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 January, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.87/2022
Rajnikant @ Laxminarayan vs. State of M.P.
Gwalior, Dated : 07/01/2022
Shri Pawan Vijayvargiya, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri C.P. Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State.
Case diary is available.
This first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed
for grant of bail.
The applicant has been arrested on 14.11.2021 in connection
with Crime No.237/2015 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District
Sheopur for offence under Section 379 of IPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that it is a case of
bail jump. The applicant did not appear before the Trial Court on
24.4.2018 and in execution of warrant of arrest he has been arrested
on 14.11.2021. He has gone to different places in search of livelihood.
However, now he has learnt a lesson and apart from depositing the
amount of bail bond executed by him on earlier occasion, he is ready
and willing to abide by any stringent condition which may be imposed
by the Court. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time and there
is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution
case.
Per contra, the application is opposed by the counsel for the
respondent/State. It is submitted that the applicant is not entitled for
bail as he had misused the liberty.
Considering the period of detention coupled with the fact that
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.87/2022
Rajnikant @ Laxminarayan vs. State of M.P.
that in view of third wave of Covid19 pandemic, it is also necessary to
decongest the jail, and without commenting on the merits of the case,
the application is allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that the
applicant shall be released on bail on depositing the amount of bail
bond executed by the applicant on earlier occasion and on furnishing
cash surety of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) or in the
alternative on depositing his original title-deed(s) [not Rin Pustika] of
the immovable property worth of more than the said amount, as
directed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sharo @ Shahrukh Vs.
The State of MP by order dated 06.09.2021 passed in SLP (Cri)
No. 6321/2021 to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court
to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.
This order shall remain effective till the end of trial but in case
of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
It is made clear that single default in appearance before the Trial
Court, or in case of registration of new offence, this bail order shall
automatically come to an end and the cash surety so furnished by the
applicant shall automatically stand forfeited without any reference to
the Court. In case, the title deeds have been deposited, then the same
shall not be returned unless and until the surety amount is deposited.
It is also made clear that the deposit of amount of bail bond
executed by the applicant on earlier occasion shall be the condition
precedents for release of the applicant.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC No.87/2022
Rajnikant @ Laxminarayan vs. State of M.P.
In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the
case of Aparna Bhat and others Vs. State of M.P. Passed on
18.03.2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 329/2021, the intimation
regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant.
CC as per rules.
-(G.S. Ahluwalia)
(alok) Judge
ALOK KUMAR
2022.01.07 16:50:33 +05'30'
