Jeeshan vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Anil Verma, J

This is the second application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.837/2022 registered at Police Station - Rajendra Nagar, Indore(M.P.) for the offence under Sections 306, 34 of IPC and under Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act.

Applicant's first bail application was dismissed vide order dated 24.01.2023, passed in MCRC No.1795/2023.

Applicant has filed this second repeated bail application on the ground that after passing the earlier order, bail application of co-accused Yasib Khan has been allowed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 18.08.2023, passed in Special Leave to Appeal(Crl.) No.8394/2023.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of the present applicant is similar to that of aforesaid co-accused Yasib Khan, who has been enlarged on bail. Therefore, on the ground of parity learned counsel submits that the present applicant also deserves to be enlarged on bail. He further submits that the final conclusion of trial will take considerable long time. Applicant is suffering jail incarceration since 02.11.2022. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.

Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that applicant's earlier application was dismissed on merit. He further submits that case of present applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Yasib Khan There is no material changes in the circumstances, hence the applicant does not deserve for bail.

Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below.

Considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation and also taking note of the fact that during the investigation, call details have been obtained by the police, mobile phone has been recovered from the possession of co-accused, other co-accused persons are still absconding and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time. All these grounds raised by the applicant have already been considered in the earlier bail application. After passing the earlier order, there is no material changes in the circumstances in which the applicant may be entitled for bail. Therefore, the applicant cannot claim parity with co-accused Yasib Khan.

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Hence, this repeat(second) bail application is rejected.