THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

M.Cr.C. No. 3508/2020

(Anuj alias Chotu Vs. State of M.P.)
(1)

Gwalior, dated : 29/1/2020

Shri Avadhesh Parashar, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri H.D.Mishra, Public Prosecutor for the respondent-

State.

Case Diary is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The applicant has filed this repeat application under

section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The earlier one was

dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15/11/2019 passed in

M.Cr.C. No.47066/2019.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Gormi,

Bhind, in connection with Crime No.284/2019 registered in

relation to the offence punishable under section 307/34 of the

IPC.

Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that on

7/9/2019, at about 8.30 AM, while the applicant was returning

home on his cycle from the house of one Jeetu Gurjar, the

applicant along with other accused persons came on two

Motorcycles and surrounded him. The applicant intercepted

complainant's way by stopping his Motorcycle in front of his

 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 3508/2020
(Anuj alias Chotu Vs. State of M.P.)
(2)

cycle. The other Motorcycle was being ridden by co-accused

Ashish on which Atul was riding pillion. Co-accused Kaushal

Thapak was sitting with applicant on his Motorcycle. Owing to

previous enmity, co-acused Kaushal Thapak fired from his 315

bore country made pistol causing injury on left knee and co-

accused Atul also fired with his 315 bore country made pistol

causing injury on complainant's right thigh. Thereafter all of

them fled from the spot.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

applicant has been falsely implicated. He is in custody since

11/9/2019. Charge-sheet has been filed. No further custodial

interrogation is required. It is submitted that the applicant has

not fired any gun shot. The injuries received by the complainant

are not dangerous to life. The applicant has no criminal

antecedents. He is ready and willing to abide by the terms ad

conditions as may be imposed by this Court and there is no

likelihood of his absconsion. With the aforesaid submissions,

prayer for grant of bail is made.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and

prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the

 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 3508/2020
(Anuj alias Chotu Vs. State of M.P.)
(3)

allegations and the material available on record, no case for

grant of bail is made out.

However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits

of the rival contentions at this juncture. Considering the facts

and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that trial is

not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial

detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court

is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant, though

on comparatively stringent conditions.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of

the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the

applicant namely Anuj alias Chotu be released on bail on

furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lac only) with two solvent and local sureties of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each to the

satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his

appearance on the dates given by the concerned 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

 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No. 3508/2020
(Anuj alias Chotu Vs. State of M.P.)
(4)

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 will not seek unnecessary adjournments
during the trial; and
5. The applicant will not leave India without previous
permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as
the case may be.
6. The applicant shall appear before the trial Court on
first of every month during pendency of trial
7. If the applicant indulges in any offence while on
bail, this order shall automatically stand cancelled
without reference to the Court.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for

compliance.

C.c. as per rules.

(S.A. Dharmadhikari)
Judge
(and)

ANAND
SHRIVASTAV
A
2020.01.29
17:17:18
+05'30'