Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 May, 2024
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 15 th OF MAY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6035 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
ARUN S/O SHRI SANDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL NEPANAGAR R/O GEETA DATT
NAGAR BHURHANPUR DISTRICT BURHANPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI MANISH DATT, SR. ADVOCATE WITH
SHRI RAHUL DIWAKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION LALBAGH DISTRICT BURHANPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AKSHAY NAMDEO, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the second 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 his arrest, in connection with FIR
No.612/2022 registered at Police Station-Lalbagh, District-Burhanpur (MP) for
the offence under Sections 420, 409, 34, 120-B of IPC.
2. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that
applicant is an Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Department, and a Government
servant. There is no likelihood of his absconding from law. It is further
submitted that applicant will cooperate in investigation of the case. It is
submitted that as per prosecution story allegations are made regarding
defalcation of an amount of Rs.36,06,000/-. It is submitted that there is
allegation of Rs.12 lakhs against the applicant. Applicant is ready to deposit the
said amount. 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. It is submitted that a large scale scam
has been committed. Government has been defrauded of crores of rupees. As
per allegation in case diary, applicant has credited into his account an amount of
Rs.36,06,000/-. It is submitted that investigation is incomplete and applicant
may be required for investigation. Looking to the nature of offence alleged
against the applicant he may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. During the course of argument, it is informed to Court that other
Government servants, who were similarly situated, have been released on bail
on deposit of the amount alleged against them. Learned Senior counsel for the
applicant expresses that applicant is also ready to deposit the said amount and
he will cooperate in investigation.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,
anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is allowed on conditions
that:-
(i) Applicant will immediately join the investigation after being released on
anticipatory bail.
(ii) Applicant will hand over FDR for an amount of Rs.36,06,000/-
(Thirtysix Lakhs Six Thousand Only) before the Investigating Officer within
four weeks from today with instructions to Bank to renew the FDR periodically
till conclusion of trial.
(iii) Said FDR shall be subject to final judgment which will be passed by
the trial court.
7. 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 his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only)
with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.
8. Applicant shall abide by the following conditions under Section 438(2)
of Cr.P.C:-
(a) Applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police
Officer as and when required;
(b) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or
promise to complainant or witnesses;
(c) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
(d) He shall not commit similar offence, of which, he is accused or
suspected.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE
mms
