High CourtsSingle Bench(2006) 09 MP CK 0079

Meena Mandeliya vs State of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 8 September 2006 · Citation: (2006) 4 MPLJ 180

HON’BLE JUDGES
Abhay Gohil, J
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Cri. Case No. 2392 of 2006

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 785 words

Abhay Gohil, J.

This is second repeat bail application u/s 439 of Criminal Procedure Code in Crime No. 52/06 registered as P.S. Gola-ka-Mandir, Distt. Gwalior for the offence u/s 420 of Indian Penal Code. The earlier application was dismissed as withdrawn.

It is stated that the applicant is in custody from 14-2-2006. It is further stated that the applicant is a lady, who dishonestly induced the 70-80 persons with a view to deceive them and has taken money of Rs. 10,000/- each that she will get them engaged in employment in the State Bank of India on the post of C.I.A. Inspector. During investigation police also recovered and seized ten different kinds of attendance registers and around 150 photographs of the various persons including the men and women from her custody along with two other co-accused persons.

Shri R.K. Sharma, submitted that the applicant is a lady and belongs to poor class and she is in custody for more than six months. The charge-sheet has been filed. The offences is triable by Magistrate, First Class and the trial will take time. He has also placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashok Dhingra vs. NCT of Delhi, AIR 2000 SC 3573(1), in which the applicant had cheated a Japanese national a whopping sum exceeding Rs. 65 lacs and his application was considered at the pre-trial stage as the applicant was in custody for more than six months. The Learned Counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance in the case of Chandraswami and another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, , in which Supreme Court, thus observed :

Section 437(1) provides that when any person accused of, or suspected of, the Commission of any non-bailable offence is brought before a Court, he may be released on bail unless his case fall in Clause (i) or (ii) thereof. The present case is not covered by the said two clauses. Therefore, ordinarily, a person who is suspected of having committed an offence u/s 120-B read with section 420, Indian Penal Code would be entitled to bail; of course the paramount consideration would always be to ensure that the enlargement of such persons on bail will not jeopardise the prosecution case.

It would also be useful to refer the provision of Clause (i) and (ii) of subsection (1) of section 437, Criminal Procedure Code which reads as under:

(i) such person shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life;

(ii) such person shall not be so released if such offence is a cognizable offence and he had been previously convicted of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more, or he had been previously convicted on two or more occasions of a non-bailable and cognizable offence.

In this case nothing has been argued or shown by the Learned Counsel for the respondent-State that how the instant case will fall within the purview of Clauses (i) and (ii) of section 437(1) of Criminal Procedure Code or how the bail can be denied when she is already in custody for more than six months and the case is not punishable with death or imprisonment of life. There is also nothing that she had been convicted previously.

After hearing the rival contentions of the Learned Counsel for the parties and perusal of the record and the provisions of section 437, Criminal Procedure Code and the case law cited by the Learned Counsel for the applicant, this application can be allowed on the ground that the applicant being lady is in custody for more than six months and, the case is triable by the Magistrate, First Class and trial will take time and yet the case has not been fixed for recording the evidence of the witnesses. Accordingly this application is allowed. Applicant be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lac only) with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the following conditions:

1.

While on bail the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activities and shall not directly or indirectly threat, induce or otherwise pressurize or interfere in the prosecution evidence;

The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, or submit affidavit in this regard within three days after the date of her release before the trial Court;

While on bail applicant shall not leave the boundaries of District Gwalior till the final disposal of the criminal case.

Certified copy as per rules.