Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Govind Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Govind vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 06, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1040998

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Govind

Advocate Shri. B.J.Chourasiya

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

m.cr.c.no.8648/2012 6/08/2012 shri b.j.chourasiya, learned counsel for the applicant. shri c.k.mishra, p.p.for the respondent/state. heard finally. this is the firs.bail application filed by applicant under section 439 of the cr.p.c for grant of bail. the applicant has been arrested on 20/05/12 in connection with crime no.17/12 registered at p.s.prakash bamhauri, district chhatarpur for the offence punishable under section 304-b/34 of ipc. learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. he is father-in-law of deceased pushpa bai. it is further submitted that this applicant has strand relationship with his son rampal, husband of deceased pushpa bai and in support of his submission, he filed annexure p-2 , copy of complaint lodged against rampal on 17/01/11 therefore, he could not be involved in the said offence. it is submitted that statement of witness akhilesh was recorded after the long delay and if deceased pushpa made an oral dying declaration before akhilesh then he could have inform the police. charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to the applicant. learned counsel for the state opposes the application. considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case alongwith the nature of allegation made against the applicant, i am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release him on bail. therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicant govind shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.40,000/- (rs.forty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of committal court/trial court, for securing his presence before the said court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial. certified copy as per rules. (g.s.solanki) judge navin

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.8648/2012 6/08/2012 Shri B.J.Chourasiya, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri C.K.Mishra, P.P.for the respondent/State.

Heard finally.

This is the fiRs.bail application filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 20/05/12 in connection with Crime No.17/12 registered at P.S.Prakash Bamhauri, District Chhatarpur for the offence punishable under section 304-B/34 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case.

He is father-in-law of deceased Pushpa Bai.

It is further submitted that this applicant has strand relationship with his son Rampal, husband of deceased Pushpa Bai and in support of his submission, he filed Annexure P-2 , copy of complaint lodged against Rampal on 17/01/11 therefore, he could not be involved in the said offence.

It is submitted that statement of witness Akhilesh was recorded after the long delay and if deceased Pushpa made an oral dying declaration before Akhilesh then he could have inform the police.

Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the application.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case alongwith the nature of allegation made against the applicant, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release him on bail.

Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicant Govind shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rs.Forty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Committal Court/trial Court, for securing his presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during trial.

Certified copy as per rules.

(G.S.SOLANKI) Judge navin

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial