Anil Kumar Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6807 MP

                                      1                       MCRC-48365-2021
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  MCRC-48365-2021
          (ANIL KUMAR MIHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

2
Jabalpur, Dated : 25-10-2021
      Shri Anil Khare, learned senior Counsel with Shri Abhinav Shrivastava,
learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Shri A. Awasthy, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1.

Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. Heard.

Issue rule nisi.

So far as the interim relief is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the warrant of arrest has been issued by the Special Court dated 29.09.2021. He submits that the F.I.R. was lodged in 2014 and no summon at all has been issued to him till the date. The arrest of warrant has been issued as a first document against him. In support of his contention he relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and another in SLP (Cr.) No. 5442/2021 wherein it has been held that the arrest warrant cannot be

issued on the first date itself without issuing summons earlier to the accused. Therefore, he pleads that the warrant of arrest may kindly be stayed by enabling him to approach the jurisdictional court.

The primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the FIR presently lodged in Crime No. 525/2014 on 12.12.2014 for offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, is similar to the FIR that has already been lodged in Crime No. 97/2014 for offence punishable under Sections 376 and 384 of the I.P.C. The said FIR has resulted in a charge sheet being filed and the trial having been concluded also, the case is listed for arguments on the very same set of facts in which the instant FIR has been filed, therefore, it is contended that second FIR on the same events is not maintainable.

2 MCRC-48365-2021 Considering the contention as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and keeping in mind undisputed fact that warrant of arrest has been issued without exhausting the course of issuing summon to him earlier, we deem it just and necessary that the warrant of arrest requires to be stayed. Hence warrant of arrest, issued by the Special Court in Case no. SC.

Lok.7/2021 against the petitioner is stayed. However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the jurisdictional court and seek appropriate relief therein in accordance with law.

            (RAVI MALIMATH)                                    (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
              CHIEF JUSTICE                                               JUDGE

MSP


Digitally signed by MANVENDRA SINGH PARIHAR
Date: 2021.10.26 11:39:15 +05'30'