MP High Court Grants Bail To 18 Yr Old Boy Arrested For Allegedly Spitting On 'Mahakal' Procession After Complainant & Witness Disown Case

The above ruling came in a bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant, Adnan Mansuri was in jail since 17.07.2023 in connection with a criminal case for commission of offences punishable under Sections 295-A, 153-A, 296, 505 and 34 of IPC.

Justice Anil Verma observed, “Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also taking note of the fact that complainant Sawan has been examined before the trial Court but he has turned hostile and did not support the case of prosecution and even he has also denied his relevant portion of his FIR (Ex. P-1), eye- witness Ajay Khatri also turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution.”

“No T.I. parade has been conducted by the investigating officer, investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed, applicant is not having any criminal background, in view of the above, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail,” Justice Verma held.

According to the prosecution's account, on the evening of July 17, 2023, a Hindu procession was underway in Ujjain, when the complainant and his friends joined the procession. As the procession reached Tanki Square, unidentified individuals on the terrace of a building along the route allegedly began spitting on the procession vehicle.

Subsequently, the complainant reported the incident to the police, leading to the registration of a case against the accused under the aforesaid sections.

The counsel for the applicant had contended that the applicant was innocent and was being falsely implicated in the matter. The counsel further contended that the applicant had been in custody since 17.07.2023, and the investigation was over, with a charge sheet having been filed.

The counsel submitted that a complainant, namely, Sawan Lot (PW-1), and an eyewitness, namely, Ajay Khatri (PW-2), were examined before the trial court, and they both had turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution.

Further, the counsel submitted that the applicant was a permanent resident of Ujjain, and a final conclusion of the trial was likely to take a sufficiently long time. Thus, under the above circumstances, the prayer for the grant of bail was requested to be considered on such terms and conditions.

Contrarily, the Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State asserted that the applicant had been identified in the CCTV footage. He contended that it was a serious case concerning communal harmony, and consequently, the applicant was not deemed eligible for bail.

The Court, however, without commenting on the merits of the case, allowed the application, and directed, “the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abideby the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.”

Click Here To Read Judgement