The High Court of Madhya Pradesh granted bail to applicants charged with offences disturbing communal harmony. The court observed no evidence connected them to the crime and permitted release on bail bonds and surety.
Applicants released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.75,000 with separate solvent surety in the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA ON THE 13th OF OCTOBER, 2023 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44967 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. SHIVKUMAR S/O SHRI RAMAKANT BHARGAV OCCUPATION: LABOUR WARD NO. 23, DAHOD ROAD, AKANSHA NAGAR, MANDIDEEP, RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. MAKHAN BAIRAGI S/O VASUDEV BAIRAGI OCCUPATION: LABOUR GRAM PIPLIYA POST SAGAUR DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANTS
(BY SHRI ASHISH JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION KOTWALI, DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI KAPIL MAHANT, PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
Applicants have filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.662/2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dhar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 456, 295-A, 153-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 16 and 30 of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The applicants are in custody since 13.09.2023.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 16-10-2023 14:30:13
2
2. As per prosecution story, on 10/09/2023 Conservation Assistant, ASI Prashant Patankar submitted a written complaint at Police Station Kotwali stating that some unknown persons have entered the Bhojshala and Kamal Maula Masajid, situated at Goushala, Dhar which comes under ASI by breaking lock of back gate and attempted to install an idol. They have caused prejudice to the communal harmony in the society. On the basis of the memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, present applicants have been implicated in this offence. Accordingly, offence has been registered against the applicants.
3 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this offence. The applicants are in custody since 13/09/2023. The involvement of the present applicants is not proved in the CCTV footage. No idol has been recovered from the aforesaid spot or from the possession of the present applicants. Coaccused namely Ravi Choudhari and Manoj have been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.10.2023 passed in M.Cr.C.Nos.45099/2023 and 44169/2023. Investigation is almost over. There is no evidence available on record to connect the applicants with the aforementioned offence. Applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 are the permanent resident of District Raisen and District Dhar respectively and final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State opposes the bail applications and prays for its rejection. However, he fairly admits that no criminal antecedent is found against the present applicants.
5. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 16-10-2023 14:30:13
3
6. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants and as per the prosecution story, no idol has been found from the place of incident; the applicants are not seen in the CCTV footage; nothing has been recovered from their possession; other co-accused have been granted bail on similar circumstances; investigation is almost over and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release the applicants on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
7. It is directed that applicants be released on bail on their each furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. They shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE
VS
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA SINGH Signing time: 16-10-2023 14:30:13
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants should be granted bail in a first bail application involving offences under Sections 456, 295-A, 153-A of IPC and Ancient Monuments Act.
Whether the lack of recovered evidence and absence of applicants in CCTV footage justifies release on bail.
Whether co-accused having been released on bail influences the decision in similar circumstances.
5 provisions across 4 enactments
Shivkumar S/o Shri Ramakant Bhargav
Makhan Bairagi S/o Vasudev Bairagi
The State of Madhya Pradesh
Anil Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
