Laxmikant Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2949 MP

                                  1
 IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT JABALPUR
                            BEFORE
              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                      ON THE 17 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
               MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5577 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
LAXMIKANT PANDEY, S/O SHRI BRIJBHUSHAN
PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
BUSINESS   (MEDICAL    STORE) R/O    VILLAGE
CHANDWAHI, THANA AND TAHSIL BAHARI, DISTRICT
SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                .....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI VIDYA SHANKAR MISHRA - ADVOCATE)

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION   BAHARI, DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA
PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI AKSHAY NAMDEO - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

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

This is FIRST application under section 438 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.286/2020 registered at Police Station Bahari, District Sidhi, for the offences punishable under sections 8, 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, "the NDPS Act") and under section 5 read with section 13 of The (Madhya Pradesh) Drugs (Control) Act, 1949 (for short, "the Act of 1949").

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant informs this court that

initially police arrested the applicant but since the matter pertains to section 5 read with section 13 of the Act of 1949 in which maximum punishment is three years, therefore police released him on bail immediately. Thereafter, he cooperated in investigation. When charge sheet was filed under section 5 read with section 13 of the Act of 1949 then trial court directed the police to enhance offence under section 8 read with sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, the applicant is having apprehension of his arrest. It is further submitted that he had a licence in the name and style Pandey Medical Store, proprietor Laxmikant Pandey and the same was valid from 3.3.2016 to 2.3.2021 and incident is of 22.7.2020. Therefore, during the currency of licence, he has

been implicated. Only 12 bottles of Codistar cough syrup was found from the possession of applicant. When he participated in investigation, then he is not required to undergo rigours of confinement again. He relied upon the judgments of Apex Court in the cases of Pradeep Ram v. The State of Jharkhand reported in (2019) 17 SCC 326 and Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and others reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51. Apart from the present case, one another case is registered against the applicant which is also of the same nature of offence. Confinement may bring social disrepute and personal inconvenience. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/ trial and to make himself available as and when required. Under these grounds, counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

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

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary.

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties especially the fact that applicant participated in investigation and charge- sheet has already been filed and during the currency of licence he carried 12 bottles of Codistar cough syrup for business purpose and also in the light of judgments of Apex court as referred above in the cases of Pradeep Ram (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra), but without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority/trial Court.

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

1. The applicant shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The applicant shall not indulge himself 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;

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

6. The applicant 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 ps

Digitally signed by PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA Date: 2023.02.20 10:53:18 +05'30'