ROHIT JAIN Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of bail.

(2.) The applicant has been arrested on 21.8.2017 in connection with Crime No.531/2017 registered by Police Station Kotwali, District Ashoknagar for offence punishable under Sections 363 , 302 , 201 , 404 , 34 of IPC.

(3.) It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail from 21.8.2017. According to the prosecution case, on 14.8.2017 a minor boy aged about 15 years went missing and his dead body was recovered on 20.8.2017 and the applicant has been arrested on 21.8.2017. It is submitted that in the case of circumstantial evidence the prosecution has to establish each and every chain of circumstance beyond reasonable doubt and unless and until the chain of circumstance is complete the applicant cannot be convicted. It is further submitted that in case if the applicant is not granted bail and if he is forced to face the trial as an under trial prisoner and in case of his acquittal it would be very difficult for anybody including the State to set the clock back and the golden period of the applicant would be spoiled in the jail. It is further submitted that in the entire case diary there is no motive for the applicant to commit murder of the deceased Gautam. It is further submitted that the police has created the evidence in order to falsely implicate the applicant and he has no criminal history. To buttress his contention, the counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments in the cases of Sujit Biswas vs. State of Assam reported in 2014 (1) CCSC 41 ( SC), State of Kerala vs. Dr. Raneef reported in 2011 (1) CCSC 210 ( SC), Dipak Subhashchandra Mehta vs. CBI reported in 2012 (1) CCSC 425 (SC), Pannayar vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2010 (1) CCSC 547 ( SC) and Roop Singh @ Rupa vs. State of Punjab reported in 2008 (3) Crimes 52 (SC).