Madhya Pradesh High Court
Johar Husain @ Joyeb @ Babu Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 December, 2023
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
ON THE 20 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56098 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
JOHAR HUSAIN @ JOYEB @ BABU KHAN S/O SHRI
SULFIKAR HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB R/O AAFREEN COLONY
KAROND KALA DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI ANKIT SAXENA -ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION NISHATPURA DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.P.CHADAR - GOVT. ADVOCATE )
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant/accused
under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as he is under
apprehension of arrest, in connection with Crime No.1199/2022, registered at
Police Station-Nishapura District-Bhopal (M.P.) for the offences punishable
under Sections 419, 420, 120-B, 467, 468, 471 & 201 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant
has applied for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.1199/2022
registered by Police Station-Nishapura. Application filed by applicant was
allowed and he was released on anticipatory bail. Later on, during course of
investigation, offence under Section 467 of IPC was added. Placing reliance on
judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Suresh Jadhav & Ors. Vs.
The State of Maharashtra passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.)
No.10179/2018, counsel for applicant submitted that once an accused has been
released on bail in a crime, then addition of an offence will not alter the nature of
crime, which has been committed by him and he cannot be re-arrested. Course
open to prosecution is only to file an application for cancellation of bail and not
to re-arrest the applicant. In these circumstances, applicant may be enlarged on
anticipatory bail.
3 . Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State opposed the
application for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. Apex Court in the case of Pradeep Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand &
Anr. reported in (2019) 17 SCC 326 has laid down following guidelines in
Paragraph-31, reproduced as under :
31. In view of the foregoing discussions, we arrive at following
conclusions in respect of a circumstance where after grant of bail to an
accused, further cognizable and non-bailable offences are added:-
31.1. The accused can surrender and apply for bail for newly
added cognizable and non-bailable offences. In event of refusal of bail,
the accused can certainly be arrested;
31.2 The investigating agency can seek order from the court
under Section 437(5) or 439(2) of Cr.P.C. for arrest of the accused and
his custody;
31.3 The Court, in exercise of power under Section 437(5) or
439(2) of Cr.P.C., can direct for taking into custody the accused who
has already been granted bail after cancellation of his bail. The Court
in exercise of power under Section 437(5) as well as Section 439(2) can
direct the person who has already been granted bail to be arrested and
commit him to custody on addition of graver and non-cognizable
offences which may not be necessary always with order of cancelling of
earlier bail;
31.4 In a case where an accused has already been granted bail,
the investigating authority on addition of an offence or offences may not
proceed to arrest the accused, but for arresting the accused on such
addition of offence or offences it needs to obtain an order to arrest the
accused from the Court which had granted the bail.
6. In view of aforesaid guidelines, Police has to seek an order of arrest of
accused from the Court, in which, he has been granted bail. Accused is at
liberty to file an application for grant of bail in cognizable and non-bailable
offences or surrender before the Court.
7. In this case, applicant has already been enlarged on bail. Merely,
adding of another section will not change the nature of offence and crime,
which has been registered against applicant. Applicant has not misused the
liberty granted to him and has applied for bail before this Court.
8. Considering the orders passed by Apex Court in case of Pradeep
Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and in various other cases and also
taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, anticipatory
bail application filed by applicant is allowed. It is directed that in the event of
arrest of applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime number and the
offences, he be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.
9. The applicant is directed to join the investigation immediately and to
co-operate with the investigating agency. She will further abide by the condition
enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE
nd
