RAJKUMAR PASI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to prosecution case, on 03.07.2019, in the night at about 22.30 O'clock, upon receipt of information of dispute, police reached on spot where informer-Ranu Swami informed that at about 21.30 O'clock when she was going to attend nature call, she saw quarrel in the house of Rajkumar Pasi between family members. When she was returning, she saw that the present applicant and other accused persons were having weapons thereafter they caught her hold. On her shouting, her family members (father and brothers) reached there to save her then the accused persons attacked them with rod, wooden stick and bricks. During treatment, father of complainant i.e. Rajkumar Patel died.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that on the date of incident, his mother/Kanti Bai also lodged the FIR at Police Station Khamaria in which she alleged that the brother of Ranu Swami and her father deceased-Raj Kumar Patel along with Ranu Swami assaulted her Son applicant/accused-Rajkumar Pasi and Ramavatar with Iron Rod and on her complaint, police has registered the FIR in Crime No. 182/2019 for the offence of Sections 294 , 307 , 324 , 506 , 34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(V), 3(1) (X) of SC/ ST Act against deceased-Raj Kumar Patel, complainant Ranu Swami and her brothers. He further submits that the complainant party came to the house of the applicant and attacked them and for just protecting themselves, injuries were sustained to complainant party. The complainant party are the aggressor and injuries were sustained to Aashish Patel and Kali Patel are simple in nature. The applicant also sustained injuries on his head and counter case has also been registered against the complainant party in which Aashish Patel and Kali Patel have been released on bail. According to medical report, three injuries were found on the body of deceased whereas five persons have been implicated by the police in the case which clearly shows that the police has registered a false case against the present applicant. There is no likelihood of his absconding or tempering with the prosecution evidence. Apart from that other co-accused of the case has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. He is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the direction and conditions which may be imposed by the Court. With the aforesaid, he prays for allowing this bail application. In support of his contention he has relied the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bhagwan Swaroop Vs. State of MP reported in (1992) 2 SCC 406.

(3.) On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application submitting that the the applicant is the main accused of the case as he has assaulted the deceased on his head with iron rod which has been seized from his possession. With the aforesaid he prays for rejecting the said bail application.