Rakesh Pandey vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Deepak Khot, J

1.This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail relating to FIR/Crime No. 178/2019, registered at Police Station Bamitha, District Chhatarpur, for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 302, 364, 34 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 Arms Act. The applicant is in custody since 15.04.2025.

As per the prosecution story, the complainant lodged a report that on 07.09.2019 at about 7:00 p.m. in the evening, the complainant's brother Bammu Raja was brutally beaten by Arjun Singh, Shivakant Awasthi and two other persons due to which Bammu Raja succumbed to death and offence under the aforesaid sections have been registered against the present applicant along with other co-accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. The case is of the year 2019 and the applicant has not been arrested for a long time despite the fact that the applicant being the eye- witness in the murder case of one Arjun Singh, who is also the co-accused in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has never been arrested who has examined himself before the trial Court in that case and subsequently, on 15.04.2025, on the basis of memorandum of Arjun Singh recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act against Panchhi Pandey, the present applicant has been arrested. It is the case of the prosecution that Panchhi Pandey and Rakesh Pandey are same person. It is submitted that all the co-accused persons including those who have been named in the FIR have already been enlarged on bail in the year 2020. It is further submitted that there is no allegation against the present applicant in respect of the alleged offence. Only on the basis of memorandum according to which, Panchhi Pandey also came along with Achyut Sindhi but there is no overt act mentioned against the present applicant. Thus, it is prayed that the applicant is also claiming parity with other co-accused persons and he be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application on the ground that on the basis of memorandum of Arjun Singh, the present applicant has been implicated in the case. It is submitted that Rakesh Pandey's nick name is Panchhi Pandey and therefore, he could not be arrested in the year 2019 but when it was noticed that both the persons are same, the present applicant has been arrested in the year 2025. However, it is fairly submitted that the case of the present applicant is akin to the co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail.

Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant as well as the public prosecutor who read over the case diary before the Court.

It is evident from the memo of statement of Arjun Singh recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the present applicant had come along with Achyut Sindhi but no overt act has been alleged against the applicant. It is also mentioned in the memorandum that the applicant along with other co-accused persons assembled prior to the incident. Since, the named accused Arjun Singh had already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 28.09.2020 in M.Cr.C. No.11434/2020 and the other co-accused Shivakant Awasthi was also enlarged on bail vide order dated 28.09.2020 in M.Cr.C. No.12651/2020 (Annexure-A/3 collectively), therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the period of incarceration, this Court deems it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. Hence, without commenting anything on merit of the case, this application is allowed.

It is directed that applicant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned for his appearance before the said court on all such dates as may be fixed by that court in this regard during pendency of trial.

It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by the conditions as enumerated in Section 480(3) of BNSS.

Accordingly, this M.Cr.C. stands allowed and disposed of.

C.C. as per rules.