Ajab Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2153 MP

                                                            1
                          IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                                             ON THE 7 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                        MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4970 of 2023

                         BETWEEN:-
                         1.    AJAB SINGH S/O BAL KISHAN KUSHWAHA, AGED
                               ABOUT 46 YEARS, VILLAGE JANAKPUR TAHSIL
                               BARELI DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         2.    SHUBHAM S/O AJAB SINGH KUSHWAHA, AGED
                               ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE JANAKPUR
                               TAHSIL BARELI DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPLICANTS
                         (BY SHRI RAHUL DESHMUKH - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH STATION
                         HOUSE OFFICER BARELI RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                         (BY SHRI VIVEK LAKHERA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                               This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

                         following:
                                                             ORDER

This is the first application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C filed by the applicants who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.138/2021 registered at Police Station-Bareli, Raisen, for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 324, 506, 34, 452 and 325 of the IPC.

2. The applicants are apprehending their arrest on the basis of registration of offences referred above. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

Signature Not Verified applicants that during investigation they cooperated in investigation and Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 2/8/2023 10:27:04 AM

therefore, they availed the benefit of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., even at the time of filing of charge-sheet, concerned Court enlarged them on bail under Section 437 of Cr.P.C. Now, after deposition of statement of some witnesses trial Court found the case to be of offence under Section 452 of IPC and therefore, expressed view about issuance of arrest warrant therefore applicant has apprehension for arrest. It is further submitted that even if offence under Section 452 of IPC is treated to be made out, even then same is punishable for maximum 7 years of jail sentence and therefore, falls under the category of offences covered under the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 and later on,

affirmed in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC Online Sc 825. Confinement may bring social disrepute and personal inconvenience. Applicants undertake to cooperate in the investigation/trial and would not be source of harassment and embarrassment in any manner to the complainant side. Under these grounds, counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

3. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of this bail application.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

5. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and nature of allegation, this Court intends to allow the application, but with certain stringent conditions. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority/trial Court. Signature Not Verified Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 2/8/2023 10:27:04 AM

7. This order shall remain operative subject to compliance of the following stringent conditions by the applicants:-

(i) The applicants shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

(ii) The applicants shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

(iii) The applicants shall not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

(iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused;

(v). The applicants shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

(vi) The applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

Application stands allowed and disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance and information.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE pnm

Signature Not Verified Signed by: POONAM MANEKAR Signing time: 2/8/2023 10:27:04 AM