Shrikant Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1247 MP

                                                         1                                CRA-673-2021
                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                         CRA-673-2021
                                  (SHRIKANT SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                      7
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 05-04-2021
                            Shri Ramsharan Rathore, Advocate for the appellant.
                            Shri Yogesh Kumar Chourasiya, P.L. for the respondent-State.

Shri R.P. Dwivedi, Advocate for the respondent No.2. This is first application filed by the appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.57/2020 registered at Police Station-Ramnagar, District-Anuppur, (MP), fo r the offence punishable under Section 419, 420, 120-B/34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST Act.

As per prosecution case, on the complaint filed by the complainant- Rameshwar Panika, who belongs to Scheduled Tribe community, the police has enquired the matter and found that the appellant in connivance with co- accused committed cheating with the complainant by transferring the amount of Rs. 29,98,832/- in the account of present petitioner and other co-accused

persons. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he cheated Rs.7,36,000/- in cash from the complainant. Accordingly, the police has registered the FIR.

Learned counsel for the accused/appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is nothing on the record which shows that appellant has pursuaded the complainant to deposit, withdraw or transfer money to any account or to make payment of money. Appellant has not cheated the complainant. Appellant is a senior citizen and respected person in society. He has no criminal antecedent. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is ready to furnish the security to the satisfaction of this Court and also to abide

Signature Not with the conditions imposed on him. Therefore, learned counsel for the SAN Verified

Digitally signed by PALLAVI SINHA Date: 2021.04.06 17:28:19 IST 2 CRA-673-2021 petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the prayer of the appellant.

After hearing both the parties, on perusal of record and considering the act of present appellant in the alleged crime, as well as looking to the specific allegation made against him, I am not inclined to allow this bail application.

Since, the offences involved in the case are not punishable with more than 7 years of imprisonment and Section 41(1) of Cr.P.C. provides that the offences for which punishment prescribed is imprisonment for a term upto seven years, the accused may be kept in custody only if the condition enumerated in Section 41(1)(b)(ii) of Cr.P.C. exist. In Arnesh Kumar's case [(2014) 8 SCC 273] , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:-

"..........the arrest effected by the police officer does not satisfy the requirements of Section 41 of the Code, Magistrate is duty bound not to authorise his further detention and release the accused......".

In view of the observations laid down in the judgment referred above, I deem fit to direct as under :

(i) That, the police may resort to the extreme step of arrest only when t h e same is necessary and the appellant fails to cooperate in the investigation.

(ii) That, the appellant should first be summoned to cooperate in the investigation. If the appellant cooperates in the investigation then the occasion of his arrest should not arise.

(iii) That, if the appellant-accused surrenders himself before the Investigating Officer, he shall be produced before the Court forthwith subject to intimation to the complainant. Further, if the appellant/accused prefer a regular bail application, same may be heard & decided by the Trial Court as soon as possible preferably on the same day. Accordingly, in view of aforesaid, this petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions.

Signature Not
 SAN
Verified                     C.C. as per rules.
Digitally signed by
PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.04.06
17:28:19 IST
                                 3                       CRA-673-2021

                                    (RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA)
                                               JUDGE


                      Pallavi




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
PALLAVI SINHA
Date: 2021.04.06
17:28:19 IST