Aditya Tiwari vs The State Of M.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 6790 MP

                                                         1                             MCRC-48697-2021
                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                         MCRC-48697-2021
                                              (ADITYA TIWARI Vs THE STATE OF M.P.)


                      Jabalpur, Dated : 25-10-2021
                              Shri Sharad Verma, learned counsel for the applicant.

                              Shri Teekaram Kurmi, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State.

This first application has been 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.1211/2021, registered at Police Station- Kolar

Road, District-Bhopal (M.P.) for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 34 of IPC and also under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that the applicant along with other co- accused persons, his father and mother, demanded dowry and made cruelty with complainant and also threatened her.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not demanded any money from the complainant. Complainant, herself, went to her parental house and did not ready to live with the applicant. During

counselling also she was not inclined to live with the applicant. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the matter. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that co-accused has also been enlarged on anticipatory bail and the applicant's case is similar to that of co-accused, therefore, he is also entitled for anticipatory bail on this ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & another, [(2014) 8 SCC 273] and submits that the principles of Arnesh Kumar's c as e are also applicable to the case of applicant. The applicant is ready and willing to co- operative the investigation agency and furnish appropriate surety as may be imposed on him. In these premises, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

Per-contra learned counsel for the respondent/ State opposes the said Signature Not SAN Verified application and submits that there are specific demand from the applicant and Digitally signed by TULSA SINGH Date: 2021.10.25 17:59:18 IST 2 MCRC-48697-2021 co-accused persons as amount of Rs.6,50,000/- have been given by the father of the complainant to the father of the applicant who is co-accused through RTGS. After solemnized of marriage, a specific demand of Rs.4,69,000/- were made through Whatsapp message. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted copy of statement of account and Whatsapp

messages in support of his argument. Hence, he prays that the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

Having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and documents produced on record, I am not inclined to allow this bail application. However, looking to the fact that the offences alleged against the applicant 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 seven 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 Vs. State of Bihar & another [(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 their arrest should not arise.

(iii) That, if the applicant-accused is arrested and h wants to file application under Section 437 of Cr.P.C. for regular bail before lower Court, Signature SAN Not Verified

Digitally signed by TULSA SINGH Date: 2021.10.25 17:59:18 IST 3 MCRC-48697-2021 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 M.Cr.C. is disposed off with the aforesaid directions. C.C. as per rules.

                                                                 (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
                                                                          JUDGE

                      ts




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
TULSA SINGH
Date: 2021.10.25
17:59:18 IST