Arun Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3992 MP

                                                                                  1
                                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                                                                        MCRC No. 13862 of 2022
                                                                 (ARUN SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            Dated : 23-03-2022
                                                  Shri A.S. Garg, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Poorva Mahajan, counsel
                                            for the applicant.

                                                  Smt. Vinita Phaye, learned G.A. for the respondent/State.
                                                   With the consent, heard finally.
                                                                     ORDER

This is the first application of the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for

grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.92/2022 registered at Police Station - Dwarkapuri, Indore for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC..

Facts of the case are that complainant Hansa W/o Mohanlal Sharma lodged a complaint against the applicant alleging that her husband Mohanlal and sister of her husband, Ashalata jointly purchased a plot No. 358 admeasuring 3000 sq. ft. on 21.5.1970 and half of the plot of the north side was in possession of her husband and other half was in possession of Ashalata. Since Ashalata was unmarried and had adopted the applicant as her son and by way of a Will has

transferred all the properties to the applicant, the title and possession of half of the plot of Ashalata vested with the applicant. The applicant also got a probate from the Court of law vide judgment dated 21.07.1988.

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that half of the property of Ashalata was transferred to applicant by way of Will and for half of the property the other successors have executed the consent letter in his favour. Copy of the consent letter is placed on record.

Learned Government Advocate for respondent-State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that consent was given only in respect of half of the property whereas the applicant has sold the entire property.

From the facts floating on surface, it is clear that consent letter signed by the

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by successors is not disputed. The nature of dispute appears to be of civil nature, SAN MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHA R KOUSHAL Date: 2022.03.24 10:28:20 IST therefore, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. In view of this, the applicant is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant-Arun Sharma shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting

officer. The applicant shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

A typed copy of this order is being forwarded to the Office of the Advocate General, on their email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

MK

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHA R KOUSHAL Date: 2022.03.24 10:28:20 IST