Vinay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 January, 2025

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Vinay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 January, 2025

                                           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.          OF 2025
                                (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 15618/2024)



                         VINAY                                                  ...APPELLANT(S)

                                                             VERSUS


                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH                           ….RESPONDENT(S)



                                                          O R D E R

Leave granted.

This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated

02.09.2024 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore

in Misc. Criminal Case No. 35506 of 2024.

The appellant Vinay has been facing trial in connection

with a crime registered pursuant to FIR No. 427/2019 dated

30.07.2019 lodged with Police Station Cyber Cell/Madhav Nagar,

District Ujjain (M.P), with respect to offences punishable

under Sections 467, 468, 419, 420, 201, 120B, and 34 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 67-D of Information

Technology Act, 2000.

An application seeking regular bail having been rejected by

the High Court vide impugned order dated 02.09.2024, the

appellant has preferred the instant appeal.
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
NEETU SACHDEVA
Date: 2025.01.31
16:56:07 IST

By order dated 18.11.2024, this Court issued notice to the
Reason:

respondent.

Contd..

– 2 –

Heard learned counsel for the appellant in support of the

appeal and learned counsel for the State and perused the

material on record.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

appellant has been in jail for nearly four years; that out of

sixteen witnesses only eight witnesses have been examined and

there would be a delay in conclusion of the trial. Learned

counsel for the appellant also submitted that the co-accused

has been released on bail. Therefore, impugned order(s) may be

set aside and the relief of bail may be granted to the

appellant herein.

Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that

this is the second round of litigation before this Court.

Earlier, this Court disposed of SLP (Crl.) Nos.304/2024 and

16698/2023 on 29.01.2024 with a direction to the Trial Court to

conclude the trial expeditiously. However, since the trial has

been inconclusive, the appellant filed a fresh application for

bail before the High Court.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State, with

reference to his counter affidavit submitted that if some time

is granted to the Trial Court to conclude the trial, it would

be done expeditiously as only eight more witnesses have to be

examined. Hence, this appeal may be accordingly disposed of.

We have considered the submissions advanced at the Bar

and taken note of the fact that the co-accused has

contd..

– 3 –

already been released on bail and further the appellant

has been in jail for the last four years although, the

allegations are emanating from a monetary transaction. In

the circumstances, we find that the appellant has made out

a case for bail.

Considering the facts on record, in our view, the case for

bail is made out.

We, therefore, allow this appeal and direct as under:

“The appellant shall be produced before the concerned

Trial Court as early as possible and the Trial Court

shall release him on bail, subject to such conditions

as it may deem appropriate to impose to ensure

his presence in the proceedings arising out of FIR

No. 427 of 2019 mentioned above.”

It is directed that the appellant shall extend complete

cooperation in the trial of the instant case. The appellant

shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.

Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation

of bail granted to the appellant.

With the aforesaid directions, the criminal appeal is

allowed.

………………………………………J.
[B.V. NAGARATHNA]

….……………………………………J.
[SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA]
NEW DELHI
JANUARY 31, 2025
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-A

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 15618/2024

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02-09-2024
in MCRC No. 35506/2024 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh
at Indore]

VINAY Petitioner(s)
VERSUS

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)

IA No. 259306/2024 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

Date : 31-01-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Faisal Mohammed, Adv.

Mr. Rohin Oza, Adv.

Mr. Pushkar Karni Sinha, AOR

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR
Mr. Bittu Kumar Singh, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.

The Appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.

It is directed that the appellant shall be produced

before the concerned Trial Court as early as possible and the

Trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to such conditions

as it may deem appropriate to impose to ensure his

presence in the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 427 of 2019.

Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.

(NEETU SACHDEVA)                                (DIVYA BABBAR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                          COURT MASTER (NSH)

(signed order is placed on the file)