Bhanu Pratap Ghoshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7181 MP

                                                                               1                         MCRC-45345-2021
                                                   The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                           MCRC No. 45345 of 2021
                                                         (BHANU PRATAP GHOSHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                         4
                                         Jabalpur, Dated : 09-11-2021
                                                  Shri Maneesh Soni, Advocate for the applicant.
                                                  Shri Lokesh Jain, learned Government Advocate for the respondent-

State.

This is first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.282/2021 registered at Police Station-Bandri, District-Sagar, (MP), for the offence punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

As per prosecution, on 26.06.2021, Ms. Palak Khare, Junior Supply Officer Khurai, inspected the fair price shop Hadli. It was found that the applicant who is manager of that Shop committed various irregularities in supply and distribution of food grains to the villagers.

Learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He did not commit any offence.

There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State oppose 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 offences for which punishment prescribed is imprisonment for a term upto Signature Not Verified SAN seven years, the accused may be kept in custody only if the condition

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.11.09 17:33:32 IST 2 MCRC-45345-2021 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 applicant fails to cooperate in the investigation.

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

(iii) That, if the applicant-accused is arrested and he wants to file application for regular bail before learned trial Court, then he 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) JUDGE R

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ROSHNI SINGH PATEL Date: 2021.11.09 17:33:32 IST