Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivlal Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 August, 2019
1 MCRC-29836-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-29836-2019
(SHIVLAL SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 09-08-2019
Shri G.S. Rajpoot, counsel for the applicant.
Shri M.K. Singh, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is Second bail application filed by the applicant Shivlal Sharma under Section 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant apprehend his arrest in connection with Crime No.66/2017, registered at P.S. Barela, District Jabalpur under Section 407 of IPC and Section 9 (b) of Explosives Substance Act.
The first anticipatory bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.04.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.3641/2017.
As per the prosecution case, on 25.11.2016 complainant Satya Narayan ladda lodged a written complaint at police station averring that he, applicant Shivlal Sharma and one Gopal Prajapati were the partners of a firm namely Mahakal Dealing which was doing the business of explosive substances. On 26.06.2016, the Chief Explosive Controller inspected the godown of the firm in which explosive substances was stored. On that, he found that there was a difference in the stock mentioned in the stock record and the stock stored in the godown and that the applicant did not follow the provisions of Explosive Substances Act and Rules. On that he suspended the licence of the firm. It is further averred that the applicant embezelled explosive substance worth Rs.10 lac. On that police registered Crime No.66/2017 for the offence punishable under Section 407 of IPC and Section 9 (b) of Explosives Substance Act, applicant apprehend his arrest in that crime.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is alleged that applicant has misappropriated explosive substance of Rs.4 lacs and two loading vehicle costing Rs.6 lacs from the branch office of the firm situated at village Bara but these vehicles were purchased by the applicant in his name. Said vehicles were not the firm's property. The said godown was not in the possession of the applicant. Gopal Prajapati used to keep the keys of the said godown where explosive substance was Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 13/08/2019 13:45:38 2 MCRC-29836-2019 stored and was also looking after the affairs of the explosive substance stored in that godown. At the time of inspection, applicant was not present at the spot. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. Under these circumstances, applicant prays for anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the applicant with the crime. So he should not be released on anticipatory bail.
Earlier anticipatory bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.04.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.3641/2017, since then there is no change in circumstances. Applicant is still absconding. So, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegation, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Hence, application is rejected.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE (ra) Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 13/08/2019 13:45:38