Ravi @ Rajveer vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 6587 MP

                                                                      1
                                    IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           AT INDORE
                                                             BEFORE
                                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                          ON THE 24 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                                  MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14416 of 2023

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   RAVI @ RAJVEER S/O DEVKARAN SOLANKI, AGED
                                   ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED R/O
                                   VILLAGE SIMROL KHANDWA ROAD TEHSIL MHOW
                                   DISTT. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....APPLICANT
                                   (BY SHRI ARJUN PATHAK, ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                                   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                                   STATION VIJAY NAGAR DISTT. INDORE (MADHYA
                                   PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....RESPONDENT
                                   ( BY SHRI AJAY RAJ GUPTA, P.L.)

                                         This application coming on for orders this day, th e court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                       ORDER

This is fifth application under section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with crime No. 1012/2021 registered at P.S. Vijay Nagar, Indore for the offence punishable under sections 419, 420, 467 468, 471 of IPC.

The fourth application was dismissed as withdrawn. However, taking into consideration the custodial period of the applicant, this Court observed to expedite the trial as far as possible within 6 months. The said period has yet not been completed and the present application has been filed. The status report was called.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 25-Apr-23 11:56:20 AM

As per status report, the statement of complainant Priyanka Saluja has been recorded and at the time to statement of another witness, Savita, fresh Vakalatnama of another Advocate was filed on behalf of the applicant and adjournment was sought. The case was adjourned subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/- and the case was adjourned to 25.1.2023. On the said date, statement of PW-2-Savita has also been recorded. The next date for recording of the statement of remaining prosecution witnesses is 25.4.2023.

Counsel for the applicant insisted that application be decided on merits. The applicant has filed statement of only Savita (PW-2). As per statement of Savita, the applicant impersonated himself as a police officer and got

engaged with the complainant and in the engagement Rs.8 Lacs was paid to him. Thereafter it is stated that applicant was introduced by one of the relative of the complainant namely Rajkumar as police constable. During investigation the police seized I.D. in which the applicant showed himself to be a police officer which has been found to be forged. The trial is going on. The prosecution has yet to prove the charges of committing forgery etc.. Complainant Savita has supported the prosecution case.

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is in jail since 17.10.2021 and on the ground of custodial period, the applicant be enlarged on bail. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment passed by Apex court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2022(1) SC 51.

Counsel for the State submits that trial is still going on and prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined and as per allegation of complainant, the applicant has prima facie impersonated himself as police officer and got

Signature Not Verified engaged with the complainant. The judgment relied on by the counsel for Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 25-Apr-23 11:56:20 AM

applicant is distinguishable on facts.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the period has not not expired for concluding the trial and the application has been repeated prior to that. Apart from that as per statement of Savita Malviy(9PW-2), she has supported the prosecution case. The trial is going on and prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined.

The allegation against the applicant is serious in nature as forged ID is alleged to have been seized. Applicant cannot be granted bail on the ground of period of custody in jail especially when the trial is being going on as per status report received from the trial court.

In view of aforesaid, M.Cr.C. is dismissed.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE MK

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 25-Apr-23 11:56:20 AM