Madhya Pradesh High Court
Poonam Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47211
1 MCRC-34791-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
ON THE 20th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 34791 of 2025
POONAM SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Jagat Singh - Advocate for applicant.
Shri Dayaram Vishwakarma - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
ORDER
The applicant has filed the present application under Section 482 of
the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with S.U.M. No.509/2013 for the offence punishable under
Section 18 (a) of the M.P. Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and 22 (a), 22 (4), 27
(2), 29 (a), 29 (1), 29 (2), 29 (5) & 31 (a) of M.P. Minimum Wages Rules,
1948.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is lady
aged about 75 years. It is further submitted that due to certain bona fide
reasons, the applicant could not remain present before the learned trial Court,
pursuant to which arrest warrants were issued. It is further submitted that
though the trial Court has passed an order under Section 299 of CrPC
declaring the applicant as absconder. It is submitted that the alleged stone
crusher in question does not belong to the applicant. Learned counsel
contends that the offences alleged are triable by Magistrate, punishable with
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47211
2 MCRC-34791-2025
imprisonment up to one year only, and no custodial interrogation of the
applicant is required. The applicant undertakes to appear before the trial
Court and to cooperate with the proceedings.
3. Per contra, learned Government Advocate opposes the
application, submitting that the applicant has failed to appear before the Trial
Court on multiple occasions and has been declared an absconder under
Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further submitted that
the present application is not maintainable once the accused has been
declared an absconder. Hence, application is liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5 . In MCRC No. 25252/ 22 dated 27/2/25, Division Bench of this
Court comprising the then Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice
Vivek Jain has observed that an anticipatory bail plea is maintainable even
when proceedings under CrPC section 82 (proclamation for person
absconding) and 83 (attachment of property of person absconding) or section
299 (record of evidence in absence of accused) have been initiated against
the accused. Asha Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No.
4564 of 2024 in a groundbreaking judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on
November 12, 2024, has held that the grant of anticipatory bail is not
automatically barred even when the applicant is declared as a proclaimed
offender under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("CrPC"). This
judgment marks a significant departure from the Supreme Court's earlier
stance and highlights the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding liberty of
an individual against procedural rigidity.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:47211
3 MCRC-34791-2025
6. It is evident from the record of the Trial Court that all the offences
are bailable and the trial commenced on the complaint of the Labor
Inspector. After issuing the summons under Section 202 Cr.P.C., no
summons has been served on the accused, and bailable and non-bailable
warrants were directed to be issued, yet not served upon the accused.
Without recording its satisfaction, a proclamation was issued against the
accused on the order sheet, but no proclamation was circulated in the
newspaper. Therefore, it is clear that it did not come to the knowledge of the
accused that any complaint was pending against him in the Court. Hence,
without recording satisfactory reasons, the Trial Court issued a permanent
arrest warrant. Thus, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be
enlarged on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, M.Cr.C.is allowed.
7. It is directed to the Trial Court that if the accused surrenders
before the Court within 30 days from today or from the date of uploading of
this order on the official website, she shall be released on furnishing bail and
bond to the satisfaction of the Trial Court in the sum of Rs.5,000 (Rupees
Five Thousand only). The accused shall also comply with such other
conditions as the Trial Court may deem fit to impose.
M.Cr.C. is disposed of .
(PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE
Praveen
