Madhya Pradesh High Court
Santosh Batham @ Vata @ Lambu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 May, 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 21 st OF MAY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12987 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SANTOSH BATHAM @ VATA @ LAMBU S/O LATE SHRI
GAJRAJ BATHAM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOUR GOSPURA NO 1 POLICE THANA
HAJIRA DISTRICT GWALIOR MP (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI VIKAS SAXENA- ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
THANA PURANI CHHAWANI DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
( BY SHRI P TANWAR - P. TANWAR - PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail relating to Crime No. 66 of 2024 registered at Police
Station Purani Chhawani, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence under Sections
392 of IPC & Sections 11/13 of MPDVPK Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated. Further argument is that the FIR was lodged on
account of some misunderstanding between the complainant who is sister of
applicant. Further submission is that complaint is present in person before this
Court and she has no objection, if the bail is granted to applicant/accused. The
applicant is in custody since 17.02.2024. His custodial interrogation is not
required in this case as looted articles have already been seized. Further
submission is that in all cases except the case registered in the year 2023,
applicant/accused has already been acquitted and copies of judgment are
annexed with application. The applicant is permanent resident of District
Gwalior (M.P.) and there is no possibility of his absconding or tempering with
prosecution case. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the bail
application and prayed for its rejection.
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 the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond
in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one local solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal 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 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 same nature of offence
or any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing
which, this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically
without further reference to the Court.
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 before
the SHO of the concerning police station in the first
week of every month 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
vpn
