Parmanand Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Parmanand vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 27, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1052020

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1052020
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 27, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Parmanand

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. names of these applicants did not find place in the fir. during investigation, some persons like harnarayan, shantilal, ramdas and ramdayal stated the names of these applicants, however, during trial harnarayan, shantilal and ramdas have not supported the prosecution case and ramdayal is not claiming himself as an eye witness of the incident of committing murder of chandu @ chandra shekhar. the applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, they be released on bail. learned counsel for state and objector have opposed the application. on due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, statements of aforesaid three witnesses 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, these applications are allowed and it is directed that applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of rs.35,000/- (rs.thirty five 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.991/2013 M.Cr.C.No.1138/2013 27.2.2013 Ms.Sudha Pandit, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State.

Shri S.K.Gangrade, Advocate for the objector.

These are the fiRs.bail applications filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail.

Applicant Parmanand is in custody since 27.9.2012, applicant Poonam is in custody since 21.10.2012 and applicant Shravan is in custody since 31.10.2012 in connection with Crime No.503/2011 registered at P.S.Harda, District Harda for the offence punishable under Sections 148, 302/149 and 120-B of the IPC.

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

Names of these applicants did not find place in the FIR.

During investigation, some persons like Harnarayan, Shantilal, Ramdas and Ramdayal stated the names of these applicants, however, during trial Harnarayan, Shantilal and Ramdas have not supported the prosecution case and Ramdayal is not claiming himself as an eye witness of the incident of committing murder of Chandu @ Chandra Shekhar.

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

Learned counsel for State and objector have opposed the application.

On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, statements of aforesaid three witnesses 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, these applications are allowed and it is directed that applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rs.Thirty Five 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

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Parmanand vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education