Manish Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4205 MP

                             1
             THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       MCRC No. 14679/2022
             (MANISH GURJAR Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Gwalior, Dated : 25/03/2022

      Shri Rajiv Sharma with Ms. Arpita Ghodke, Counsel for

applicant.

      Shri A.K. Nirankari, Counsel for State.

      Case diary is available.

      This is second application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for

grant of bail. The first application was dismissed by order dated

21.02.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No.8941/2022 as withdrawn.

      The applicant has been arrested on 17.01.2022 in connection

with Crime No.220/2021 registered by Police Station - Kotwali,

District Morena for offence punishable under Sections 307, 323/34 of

IPC and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.

      It is submitted by Counsel for applicant that the first bail

application of applicant was rejected on the statement of the State

Counsel that the applicant has been duly identified in the Test

Identification Parade but in fact the applicant was not identified in the

Test Identification Parade. The witnesses have been examined and

they have not identified the applicant in the dock also. At present,

there is no evidence with regard to the identity of applicant. The trial

is likely to take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his

absconding or tampering with prosecution case.

      Per contra, the application is opposed by the Counsel for the

respondent/State. It is submitted that it is true that the applicant was

not identified in Test Identification Parade but it appears that because

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No. 14679/2022 (MANISH GURJAR Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

of some misconception, an incorrect statement was made at the time of

hearing of first bail application. It is also submitted that at present,

there is no circumstantial evidence against the applicant except the

statement under Section 27 of Evidence Act.

In reply, it is submitted by Shri Sharma that in the light of

Section 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act, the confessional statement

recorded under Section 27 of Evidence Act is not admissible.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without

commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is

directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal

bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac Only) with one

surety in the like amount 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 the trial but in

case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the

case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. passed on 18/3/2021

in Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, the intimation regarding grant of

bail be sent to the complainant.

Certified copy as per rule.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Aman AMAN TIWARI 2022.03.25 15:28:45 +05'30'