Virender Singh, J
1. As declared by the petitioner, this is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
2. According to the prosecution case, on 26.07.2020 at about 11:00 am, accused Chander Singh called the complainant at Jalpa Mata Mandir for a
party to be arranged by him. The complainant along with his friend Jagdish Jatav reached on the spot. Jagdish went to the temple to have Darshan and
after a while, Chander also left the place and had gone to buy Vimal, a mouth freshener. Suddenly, a woman followed by four persons came out of the
bushes. They made allegations that the complainant had tried to sexually abuse her. They all started beating him and snatched his gold ear drops
weighing 10 gm, gold talisman (tabij) weighing 5 gm, a wristwatch, and cash of Rs. 800/-, total articles worth Rs.61,000/-. At that time, Chander came
back. All the persons abducted the complainant and took him inside the forest along with Chander, where they asked for Rs. 50,000/- under the threat
of false implication in a rape case. They let him go with a condition to pay the amount within 3 days. To ensure the payment, they got a document
executed by obtaining a thumb impression of the complainant showing the transaction of Rs. 50,000/- under the threat of life. Pretending that Chander
is not associated with the miscreants, he took a guarantee of the payment of the money demanded by them. On his guarantee, they let him go and he
(Chander) dropped him at Rajgarh at 05:00 pm. The complainant contacted his family and revealed the incident before them. After discussing the pros
& cons of the matter, they decided to lodge the FIR and in pursuance thereto, the complainant filed the FIR naming the petitioner and the other co-
accused persons stating that Chander had revealed their names.
3. It was also stated by the complainant in the FIR that a day prior to the incident co-accused - Chander had asked him for Rs. 10,000/-, but he
expressed his inability.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. All the allegations are false and
frivolous, but the police have arrested him on 09.09.2020. Since last more than three months, he is in jail. He has no criminal record. His custodial
interrogation is not required. The investigation is over. Charge-sheet has been filed. The trial is likely to take time. He is a permanent resident of
District - Rajgarh (Biaora). So, there is no possibility of his absconding. He is ready to comply with the conditions to be imposed by the Court,
therefore, he be granted bail.
5. It is further argued that co-accused persons, namely, Bharat Singh, Phoolsingh, Rajubai, and Chander Singh have been granted bail by this Court
vide order dated 15.10.2020 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.38883, 37761, 38767 & 40445 of 2020 respectively. Except for co-accused - Chander Singh, all
other co-accused persons were not known to the complainant. They have been named only on the basis of information given by the co-accused -
Chander Singh. No test identification parade has been conducted during the investigation. The petitioner has complete parity with the aforementioned
co-accused persons.
6. It is also submitted that according to the prosecution itself, the document allegedly recovered from his possession was got executed by co-accused
Bharat Singh, who has been granted bail by this Court.
7. Further, the learned Counsel submitted that no document to ensure the payment of ransom as alleged, has been recovered, but the police have
prepared false documents to show the recovery from the possession of the petitioner.
8. The learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the bail but has not controverted the fact of parity with co-accused persons.
9. It is submitted that the petitioner has been named in the FIR. The document has been recovered from his possession. He along with other co-
accused persons has conspired to extort money from the complainant. They have admitted their involvement in the crime. Co-accused Chander had
revealed the name of his companions, therefore, conducting the Test Identification Parade (TIP) during the investigation was not required. The
petitioner and the co-accused persons have abducted the complainant for ransom and only let him go after snatching his belongings and obtaining his
signature on a document to ensure the payment of ransom. This document has been recovered from the possession of the co-accused Ramprasad,
therefore, he be not granted bail.
10. The police have recovered cash Rs.2,000/- each from co-accused persons, namely, Raju Bai, Phool Singh, Bharat Singh, and Ramkailash, own
motorcycle and cash Rs.2,000/- from Chander Singh, one gold earring weighing 5.1 gm, worth Rs.25,000/- and the document got executed from the
complainant under the threat of life or false implication from co-accused Ramprasad and a gold talisman (Tabij) from the petitioner Mangilal.
11. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, the allegation made and the evidence established on record to show the involvement
of the petitioner in the crime, recovery made from him, absence of a criminal record, and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to allow the petition. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.
12. It is directed that the petitioner Mangilal S/o Amarsingh be released from custody on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the Trial Court as and when
required. He shall abide by the conditions as enumerated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
