Raja Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6837 MP

                                                            1
                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                         BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                      ON THE 6th OF MAY, 2022

                                        MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 21763 of 2022

                               Between:-
                               RAJA PANDEY S/O DAYASHANKAR PANDEY ,
                               AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
                               VILLAGE BAVANDHAR POLICE STATION JAWA
                               DISTRICT REWA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                               (BY SHRI SANJEEV KUMAR MISHRA, ADVOCATE FOR THE
                               APPLICANT)

                               AND

                               THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                               POLICE STATION PANWAR DISTRICT REWA M.P.
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                               (BY SHRI SANTOSH YADAV, DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
                               THE STATE)

                             This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
                      following:
                                                             ORDER

This is first application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant Raja Pandey S/o Dayashankar Pandey, aged about 24 years, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.80/2022 registered at Police Station Panwar, District Rewa (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated and he is apprehending his arrest because there is a criminal history of six cases against the present applicant out of which he has been acquitted in three cases. It is submitted that applicant is not involved in the present case, he is innocent. He be extended benefit of anticipatory bail.

Learned Dy. Government Advocate for the State in his turn submits that investigation is going on, name of present applicant is yet not mentioned in the list Signature SAN Not Verified of accused. Applicant has filed this application merely on the basis of Digitally signed by APARNA TIWARI Date: 2022.05.06 apprehension. It is submitted that offence is under Section 379 of IPC even 17:38:17 IST

otherwise, if, during investigation, some material comes to the knowledge of the I.O. then notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. will be issued to the applicant as offence under Section 379 is punishable upto three years imprisonment only. It is submitted that once applicant receives such notice, he will have an option to

appear before the I.O. and point out about his innocence or at that time he can move an appropriate application.

Learned Dy. Government Advocate for the respondent/State is relying on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Others in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5191/2021 decided on 7.10.2021 directed the applicant to appear before the trial Court upon filing of the charge sheet and to move application for bail and the trial Court shall consider such application in terms of the direction issued by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (supra).

Taking all these facts into consideration and the statement of learned Dy. Government Advocate that applicant's name has yet not surfaced during investigation, merely on the basis of apprehension, this application is not maintainable. Applicant will have a liberty to approach this Court, once he receives a notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C.

I n the same terms, the present anticipatory application is disposed of directing the applicant to appear before the trial Court and move bail application which trial Court shall consider in the light of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Others (supra).

In above terms, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE AT