Ramdas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 799 MP

                                   1
         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     M.Cr.C. No.14538/2021
                (Ramdas and others Vs. State of M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated:-17.3.2021
      Shri S.K. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicants.

      Shri   Alok    Sharma,     learned   Panel    Lawyer     for   the

respondent/State.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The applicants have filed this first application u/S.438 Cr.P.C.

for grant of anticipatory bail as they have an apprehension of their

arrest in connection with Crime No.125/2020 registered at Police

Station Deepnakheda, District Vidisha for the offences punishable

under Sections 294, 323,506, 34, 324, 325, 326 of IPC.

It is alleged that the applicants have been falsely implicated in

the case and they have not committed any offence in any manner,

whereas the cross case registered with respect to the same offence at

Crime No.121/2020 for the offence punishable under sections 324,

294, 323 and 506 of IPC, wherein the injuries are also being reflected

to the present applicants. It is argued that in the case where the cross

case are being registered the actual act of the applicants are required

to be seen. They have relied upon the judgment in the case of Krishna

Singh Kushwaha Vs. State of M.P. and others, M.Cr.C.No.41335/2018

dated 22.10.2018 and argued that in similar circumstances the benefit

of anticipatory bail was granted by the Coordinate Bench. It is argued

that there was no pre-intention to inflict injuries. The incident has

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.14538/2021 (Ramdas and others Vs. State of M.P.)

taken place all of a sudden with respect to grazing of a cow. In such

circumstances, the benefit of anticipatory bail should be extended to

the applicants. They are ready to abide by all the terms and conditions

that may be imposed by this Court. The applicant no.1 is 19 years of

age and is a young student and sending him to jail will ruin his

entire career. The applicant no.2 is father of applicant no.1 and is

aged about 62 years and is a senior citizen.

Per contra counsel for the State has opposed the application

stating that there is active participation of applicants in commission of

offence. The injuries are medically corroborated. Mere registration

of cross-case does not absolve the applicants from their act. It is

submitted that investigation is pending in the matter. They have not

cooperated in the investigation and still absconding. In such

circumstances, the benefit of bail should not be extended to the

applicants.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

diary.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and

the fact that there is active participation of the applicants in

commission of offence which are medically corroborated, this Court

does not deem it appropriate to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.14538/2021 (Ramdas and others Vs. State of M.P.)

is dismissed. Applicants are directed to surrender and apply for

regular bail.

E-copy/Certified copy as per rules/directions.

(Vishal Mishra) Judge Pawar* ASHISH PAWAR 2021.03.19 15:22:16 +05'30'