Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shubham Raikwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2022
Author: Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 4th OF MAY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 19627 of 2022
Between:-
SHUBHAM RAIKWAR S/O SUNDARLAL RAIKWAR , AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT VILLAGE
TIJALPUR P.S. GAIRATGANJ DIST. RAISEN MP (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI SANKALP KOCHAR, ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION GAIRATGANJ DIST. RAISEN MP (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SUDEEP CHATTERJEE, GOVT. ADVOCATE )
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
This is the second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant
for grant of bail.
His first bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 28.03.2022 passed
in M.Cr.C.No.14736/2022 and was given liberty to repeat the same after filing of the charge
sheet.
The applicant has been arrested on 10.03.2022 by Police Station - Gairatganj, District
Raisen (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.84/2022 for the offence punishable under
Section 306 of Indian Penal Code.
It is pointed out that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the crime. He has not
committed any offence in any manner. The allegation against the applicant is that he was
involved in relationship with the deceased on false promise of marriage but subsequently he
has refused to marry her. There is omnibus allegation against the present applicant that he
was intervening in the deceased's marriage where the parents of the deceased were trying to
Signature Not Verified
get her marriage solemnized. There is nothing on record to demonstrate the same. It is
SAN
further pointed out that there are no specific allegations which fulfill the ingredients of
Digitally signed by ANINDYA SUNDAR
MUKHOPADHYAY
Date: 2022.05.05 11:48:45 IST
Section 107 of I.P.C. to make out a case under Section 306 of I.P.C. It is submitted that the
charge sheet has been filed on 07.04.2022 in the matter. He has placed reliance upon the
judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Anil Kumar Vs. State of
Punjab reported in (2000) 9 SCC 455, S.S.Chhena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajanm
reported in (2010) 12 SCC 190, Madan Mohan Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2010)
8 SCC 628, Gangula Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (2010) 1 SCC 750, M.
Mohan Vs. State reported in (2011) 3 SCC 626, Randhir Singh Vs. State of Punjab
reported in (2004) 13 SCC 129 and further placed reliance upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurucharan Singh Vs. The State of Punjab
reported in 2020 (10) SCC 200 and Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs State Of M.P.
reported in 2002 Vol.5 SCC 371 in support of his submissions. The applicant is the first
offender. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this
Court while considering his bail application. In view of the aforesaid, he prays for grant of
bail.
P er contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the
prayer stating that there are specific allegations against the present applicant. It is submitted
that the earlier application was rejected on merits with detail observations but he could not
dispute the fact that liberty was extended to repeat the same after filing of the charge sheet.
The applicant is a first offender is also not disputed by the State counsel.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the
aforesaid judgments, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this application is
allowed subject to verification of the fact that the applicant is the first offender. The
applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
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
Signature Not Verified
SAN any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such
MUKHOPADHYAY facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
Digitally signed by ANINDYA SUNDAR
Date: 2022.05.05 11:48:45 IST
4. The applicant shall not involve in any other offence, in case the 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
his 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.
I n view of the COVID-19, jail authorities are directed to follow the Covid-19
protocol as per the Government guidelines before releasing the applicant on bail.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
AM
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ANINDYA SUNDAR
MUKHOPADHYAY
Date: 2022.05.05 11:48:45 IST
