Kajju @ Kadir Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6400 MP

                                                           1                             MCRC-9659-2021
                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                          MCRC-9659-2021
                                        (KAJJU @ KADIR KHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                      17
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 04-10-2021
                               Heard through Video Conferencing.
                               Shri Mrigendra Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Gunchha
                      Rasool, learned counsel for the applicant.
                               Shri Akhilendra Singh, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/

State.

Case diary is available.

This first application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.38/2021, registered at Police Station- Adhartal, Jabalpur (M.P.) for offences punishable under Section 292 (C) of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act,1956.

A s per prosecution case, the Police registered the aforesaid crime against the applicant on the basis of written complaint made by the Patwari at the instance of SDM Adhartal alleging that the applicant without obtaining

prior statutory permissions has developed the illegal colony situated under the territorial jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that earlier the land in which the colony is being developed comes under territorial jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat and vide order 20.8.2014 concerning Gram Panchayat has issued NOC for development of such colony, therefore the Provisions of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 is not applicable in the present case. The applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the crime in question. The principle of Arnesh Kumar's case are also applicable to the case of applicant. The applicant is ready and willing to co-operative the investigation agency and furnish appropriate surety

Signature Not as may be imposed on him.

SAN Verified

Digitally signed by KRISHAN KUMAR CHOUKSEY Date: 2021.10.05 12:13:27 IST 2 MCRC-9659-2021 Per-contra learned counsel for the respondent/ State opposes the said application submitting that allegations levelled against the applicant are specific and therefore, he may not be released on anticipatory bail.

Having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court is not inclined to allow this bail application. However, looking to the fact that 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 s even years, the accused may be kept in custody only if the condition enumerated in Section 41(1)(b)(ii) of Cr.P.C. exists. 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......".

Therefore, 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 the 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 under Section 437 of Cr.P.C. for regular bail before lower Court, then he will be produced before the lower Court without any delay.

Lower Court is also directed to consider his bail application as expeditiously as possible, preferably, on the same day.

This petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions.

Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
KRISHAN KUMAR
CHOUKSEY
Date: 2021.10.05
12:13:27 IST
                                                  3                MCRC-9659-2021
                            C.C. as per rules.

                                                     (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                                              JUDGE


                      kkc




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
KRISHAN KUMAR
CHOUKSEY
Date: 2021.10.05
12:13:27 IST