Raju Tomar @ Rajbahadur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 5595 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Raju Tomar @ Rajbahadur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 February, 2024

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                                1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT GWALIOR
                                                       BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                                              ON THE 23 rd OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7926 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAJU TOMAR @ RAJBAHADUR S/O SHRI SHAMBHU
                           SINGH TOMAR, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                           AGRICULTURIST, R/O VILLAGE PIPRIPOOTH THANA
                           NAGRA DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI S.K. MISHRA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                           STATION AMBAH DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI PRABHAKAR KUSHWAHA - PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This application coming on for Admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

This is fourth application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to Crime No. 753 of 2014 registered at Police Station Ambah, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 363, 364 (A), 120-B and 34 of IPC and Section 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.

This is a case of bail jump.

Earlier the applicant was granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.08.2016 in M.Cr.C.No.8455 of 2016, however, during the course of trial, he remained absent before the trial court on

10.08.2018 therefore, perpetual warrants of arrest has been issued against the present applicant on 27.12.2021 and in compliance of which he got arrested on 25/10/2023 and since then he is in custody.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that absence of the applicant/accused is bonafide as he went outside i.e. Gujrat for his livelihood, therefore his counsel did not inform him about the date of hearing. Further submission is that two eye witnesses were examined in his presence have not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile and even co-accused persons were acquitted by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated

30.11.2023. It is further argued that applicant is in custody since 25.10.2023 and he is ready and willing to abide by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court upon him and will never misuse the liberty so granted. The applicant is permanent resident of District Morena. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time and there is no likelihood of his absconsion, if released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

P er contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its dismissal.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) be forfeited from previous personal bond of the applicant and on furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he should be released on

bail.

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

4) The applicant shall not commit an offence of which he is accused;

5) The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6 ) The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

7. The applicant shall mark his attendance once in every first week of every month before concerning Police Station till conclusion of trial.

Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance,

if possible, by the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE

(LJ*)