Bablu vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Appearing counsel for the parties are heard on alleged third (repeat) bail application filed before this Court under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in relation

to Crime No.230/2015 registered at Police Station Kumbharaj, District Guna in reference to the offences punishable under Section 376-D and 370-A

of the IPC, in relation to which a Sessions Trial No.15/2017 is pending before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chachoda, District Guna and

the produce case diary and papers filed on behalf of applicant are also perused.

It is mentioned that the applicant was arrested on 09.01.2017 and his first application under same provision was dismissed on 10.04.2017 as withdrawn

by this Court and second regular bail application was dismissed on 20.09.2017 by this Bench on merit, whose certified copy is annexed with the

application.

It has been contended by the appearing counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused Nainya alias Nandkishore and Sevak Sen have

already been granted benefit of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2016 and 16.08.2017 respectively passed by this Court and the case

of present applicant Bablu is not more serious than above-mentioned co-accused persons, who have been granted the benefit of regular bail and there

is no possibility of early disposal of relating Sessions Trial, hence, it is prayed that benefit of regular bail be given to present applicant-Bablu.

Per contra, above-mentioned prayer has been strongly opposed by the Pubic Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State on ground that applicant-

Bablu was previously absconding and he could be arrested on 09.01.2017, whereas when the charge-sheet was filed by the police on 26.09.2015

before the relating Magistrate Court, then present applicant Bablu was absconding and therefore his case could not be considered similarly to case of

other co-accused persons, who have been granted benefit of regular bail by this Court and applicants' previous bail application was dismissed by this

Court on 20.09.2017 on merits, whereas above-mentioned bail orders in relation to co-accused persons Nainya alias Nandkishore and Sevak Sen were

passed on 26.09.2016 and 16.08.2017 and after dismissal of applicant's prior application by this Court on 20.09.2017, no new ground is available to the

present applicant, hence, dismissal of present regular bail application is prayed.

It appears from the record that the co-accused Nainya alias Nandkishore was arrested on 14.07.2015 and co-accused Sevak Sen was arrested on

15.07.2015, whereas the present applicant Bablu could be arrested only on 09.01.2017 and it is clear that present applicant's previous bail application

was dismissed by this Court on 20.09.2017, whereas above-mentioned bail orders of co-accused persons were passed previously to it appears that

previously applicant-Bablu was absconding and he could be arrested only on 09.01.2017. It is well settled that in relation to regular bail application, the

point of applicant's regular appearance before this Court in future is substantial and in this relation alleged abscondence of accused could not be

ignored.

Considering the rival contentions raised by the counsel for the parties, without commenting on the merits of the case, it appears that due to long

abscondence of present applicant-Bablu, his case in relation to prayer of bail could not be compared with above-mentioned co-accused persons, who

were arrested in July, 2015. It appears that after prior dismissal of bail application of applicant Bablu on merits by this Court on 20.09.2017, no new

ground is available to the present applicant, therefore, above-mentioned repeat bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Bablu is also dismissed.

Case diary be returned.

Certified copy as per rule.