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.

Sukhilal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Sukhilal vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 03, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1051356

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

Sukhilal

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

m.cr.c.no.2890/2013 3.4.2013 shri shankar prasad singh, advocate for the applicants. shri r.k.kesarwani, pl for the state. this is the firs.bail application filed by the applicants under section 439 of the cr.p.c.for grant of bail. the applicants are in custody since 22.1.2013 in connection with crime no.38/2013 registered at p.s.badwara, district katni for the offences punishable under sections 304, 201/34 of the ipc and section 138 of the indian electricity act. learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. at the most it would be a case under section 304-a of the ipc. charge sheet has been filed. the applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, they be released on bail. learned counsel for state has opposed the application. on due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.30,000/- (rs.thirty thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the committal court/ trial court for securing their 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 pb

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.2890/2013 3.4.2013 Shri Shankar Prasad Singh, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State.

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

The applicants are in custody since 22.1.2013 in connection with Crime No.38/2013 registered at P.S.Badwara, District Katni for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 201/34 of the IPC and Section 138 of the Indian Electricity Act.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case.

At the most it would be a case under Section 304-A of the IPC.

Charge sheet has been filed.

The applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, they be released on bail.

Learned counsel for State has opposed the application.

On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.Thirty Thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the committal Court/ trial Court for securing their 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 PB

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial