Amar Das Senani vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2026

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:12477




                                                             1                           MCRC-19215-2026
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                        BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
                                                    ON THE 4 th OF MAY, 2026
                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 19215 of 2026
                                                    AMAR DAS SENANI
                                                          Versus
                                              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Vivek Dalal - Advocate for the applicant.
                                  Shri Lokendra Joshi - Advocate for the respondent.

                                                                 ORDER

1. This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 482 of B.N.S.S. for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.55/2026 registered at Police Station - Economic Offence Wing (EOW), P.T.C. Parisar, Ring Road, Musakhedi, Indore (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120-B of IPC and Section 7, 13(1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant

is serving as a Government Officer of the Nagar Parishad and pursuant to some project of water supply, the applicant has not deducted 10% of the contract value amounting to Rs.27,16,008/-. Thereafter the FIR is lodged against the applicant and the said amount is deducted, therefore, there is no loss to the public exchequer. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has cooperated in the process of

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:12477

2 MCRC-19215-2026 investigation whenever the investigating officer called him. The allegation levelled against the applicant are essentially on the basis of documentary evidence, therefore, he submits that further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. Therefore, he submits that looking to the age of the applicant and also considering the fact that he has cooperated during the process of investigation and that there is no loss to the public exchequer, the application for anticipatory bail may kindly be allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent-EOW has submitted that from the record itself there is clear involvement of the present applicant and the amount is required to be recovered during the process of investigation. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, no discretion should be exercised in favour of the applicant. Hence, the applicant does not deserve to

be extended benefit of anticipatory bail.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. Considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary and considering the fact that the applicant is a government servant and also considering the fact that the loss of certain amount caused to the public exchequer due to negligence on the part of the present applicant has been deposited by the applicant and considering the nature of allegation which are based mainly on the documentary evidence and considering the fact that the applicant has cooperated during investigation, the anticipatory bail is allowed on the following terms:-

(i) It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:12477

3 MCRC-19215-2026 upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

(ii) the applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation by a police officer, as and when required;

(iii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iv) if the applicant is found involved in any criminal case of the same nature during this bail period, this order granting the benefit of anticipatory bail shall be liable to be cancelled;

(v) he shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.

(SANDEEP N. BHATT) JUDGE

trilok