Dhananjay Singh Karchuli vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 493 MP

                                                                           1                          MCRC-55830-2021
                                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       MCRC No. 55830 of 2021
                                                   (DHANANJAY SINGH KARCHULI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                       Jabalpur, Dated : 11-01-2022
                                             Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                             Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, counsel for the applicant.
                                             Shri Reji Mathai, panel lawyer for the respondent/State.

This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicants for grant of bail.

Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed as having

rendered infructuous vide order dated 08.11.2021, in M.Cr.C. No.50894/2021.

T h e applicant has been arrested on 22.09.2021 by Police Station Beohari, District Shahdol in connection with Crime No.609/2015 for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

It is pointed that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and he has not committed any offence in any manner. It is submitted that the applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum of co- accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The applicant was

also not present at the place of commission of offence. No recovery has been made from the present applicant. The applicant is the first offender and is in custody since 22.09.2021. The investigation is over and the charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. He is ready to abide by all terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering his application for grant of bail. Counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 2 SCC 246. It is argued that there is no relevance of memorandum of Section 27 of the Evidence Act of the other co-accused on the basis of which the applicant has been implicated. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail.

Signature Not Verified SAN Per contra, counsel appearing for the State has vehemently opposed

Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2022.01.12 10:46:35 IST 2 MCRC-55830-2021 the prayer stating that the offence was committed in the year 2015 and he has remained absconded for a considerable period of six years. With great difficulty he was arrested after six years, but he could not dispute the fact that only on the basis of memorandum of Section 27 of the Evidence Act he has been made accused in the case. Filing of the charge-sheet and the fact that the applicant being the first offender is also not disputed by the State counsel.

Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case without commenting upon the merits of the case, this application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail subject to the verification of the fact that the applicant is the first offender and o n furnishing surety bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

I n view of the COVID-19, jail authorities are directed that before releasing the applicant, medical examination of applicant shall be undertaken by the jail doctor and on prima-facie, if it is found that he is having the symptoms of COVID-19, then consequential follow up action including the isolation/quarantine or any test if required, be ensured, otherwise applicant shall be released immediately on bail and shall be given a pass or permit for movement to reach his place of residence.

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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicant shall not involve any other offence, in case the Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2022.01.12 10:46:35 IST 3 MCRC-55830-2021 applicant indulge in any other criminal case the benefit of bail as extended by this Court shall automatically cancelled;

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. If the applicant is found involved in any case except present one, his bail shall stand rejected without any reference to the court;

8. The applicant will inform the concerned S.H.O. of concerned Police Station about their residential address in the said area and it would be the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of concerned

police station as well as Superintendent of Police concerned who shall inform the concerned SHO regarding the same.

Application stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

taj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2022.01.12 10:46:35 IST