Mithlesh Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3848 MP

                                                                               1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                                   MCRC No. 9951 of 2022
                                                          (MITHLESH PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                      Dated : 21-03-2022
                                            Shri Bhuvneshwar Singh Thakur, counsel for the applicant.
                                            Shri Puneet Shroti, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

Shri Aman Patel, counsel for the objector.

Heard.

This first application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail in connection with Crime

No.211/2022 registered at Police Station Kolganwan, District Satna, for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 386, 393 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 12/02/2022. He further submits that complainant has lodged a false complaint to the police against the applicant. He has not committed any offence in any manner. He further submits that earlier also complainant had lodged a report against the applicant to extract money from the applicant and his family claiming herself to be wife of applicant. He submits that complainant is a married lady, deserted her husband and started residing separately in her maternal home at Lalpur. He

submits that applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that has been imposed by this Court while considering his bail application. In view of the aforesaid, he prays for grant of bail.

On the other hand, Government Advocate has opposed the prayer of bail pointing out that present applicant has past criminal antecedents and earlier case of Section 376 is also registered against him vide crime no.65/2014.

In response, counsel for applicant submits that though in the aforesaid case applicant was tried, but now he has been acquitted by First Additional Sessions Judge, Amar Patan District Satna vide judgment dated 03/03/2016.

Counsel for objector has also supported the stand taken by the counsel for the State and further submits that in view of the nature of crime and criminal

Signature Not Verified antecedents of the applicant his bail application deserves to be dismissed. SAN

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this court Digitally signed by SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Date: 2022.03.23 14:33:59 IST

deems it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, without

commenting anything on merit, this application is allowed.

It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rupees Eighty Thousand )with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for

his appearance on the dates given by it.

I t is further directed that the applicant shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE

sushma

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Date: 2022.03.23 14:33:59 IST