Ramkaran Kushwaha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2080 MP

                                                                            1                           MCRC-14514-2021
                                                 The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                           MCRC-14514-2021
                                                  (RAMKARAN KUSHWAHA AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                         5
                                         Jabalpur, Dated : 31-05-2021
                                                Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                                Shri Manish Tiwari, Advocate for the applicants.
                                                Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

Shri Priyank Awasthy, learned counsel for the complainant. This is first application filed by the applicants under Section 438 of

Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.13/2021 registered at Police Station-Alipura, District-Chhatarpur, (MP), for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 323, 294, 506 & 325/34 of IPC.

As per prosecution, on 02.02.2020, appellants abused filthy language to the complainant/Om Prakash Kushwaha and also committed Marpeet and threatened to kill him.

Learned counsel for the accused/applicants submits that the applicants

have been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity. There is no probability of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State and objector opposes the prayer of the applicant.

After hearing both the parties, on perusal of record and considering the act of present applicant 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 Signature Not Verified SAN offences for which punishment prescribed is imprisonment for a term upto

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.05.31 17:44:43 IST 2 MCRC-14514-2021 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 applicants fails to cooperate in the investigation.

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

(iii) That, if the applicants-accused are arrested and they wants to file application for regular bail before learned trial Court, then they will be produced before the lower Court without any delay. Lower Court is also directed to consider their bail application as expeditiously as possible, preferably, on the same day.

Accordingly, in view of aforesaid, this petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions.

C.C. as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) V. JUDGE R

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.05.31 17:44:43 IST