Rameshwar Dayal Nagina vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1957 MP

                                                                               1                          MCRC-24081-2021
                                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                          MCRC-24081-2021
                                                         (RAMESHWAR DAYAL NAGINA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                               Indore, Dated : 13-05-2021
                                            Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                            Shri Akhilesh Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant.
                                            Shri Amit Rawal, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

This is the first application filed under section 438 Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with

Crime No.103/2021 registered at police station Kurawar, District Rajgarh for the offence punishable under section 61 (gh) Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Rajya Avam Gram Rajasv Adhiniyam, 1993.

As per prosecution story, the applicant is the owner of land bearing survey No.39/1/2/1 area 0.152 hectors has sold the same to two persons which amounts to illegal colonization. Accordingly to the prosecution, the applicant was required to obtain the colonizer license order of diversion, development works before selling the land. A show cause notice has been issued to him but he did not file any reply, therefore, FIR has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that being an owner he has sold the land to two persons that does not amounts to a colonization. He was in need of money therefore he sold the land. There is no complainant in this case.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and prayed for rejection of the application.

In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 applies in this case and the Hon' apex Court in the latest judgment directed not to arrest the accused in which maximum punishment is seven years.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2021.05.17 10:44:59 IST 2 MCRC-24081-2021 upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. This order shall be governed by the following conditions:

(a) the applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(c) If the applicant is found involved in any criminal case of the same nature during this bail period, this order granting the benefit of anticipatory bail shall be liable to be cancelled;

C.c as per rules.

(VIVEK RUSIA) V. JUDGE

jyoti

Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by JYOTI CHOURASIA Date: 2021.05.17 10:44:59 IST