Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arurendra Kumar Chaturvedi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2022
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 14th OF FEBRUARY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6504 of 2022
Between:-
ARURENDRA KUMAR CHATURVEDI S/O SHRI
HEERALAL CHATURVEDI , AGED ABOUT 28
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O
VILLAGE AMJHOR, P.S. JAISINGHNAGAR, DISTT.
SHAHDOL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ANIL DWIVEDI, ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
MANPUR DISTT. UMARIYA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AMIT PANDEY, PANEL LAWYER )
(Heard through Video Conferencing)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.353/2021 registered at Police Station- Manpur, District- Umariya for the offence punishable under Sections 420 & 409 of IPC and Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act.
It is submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case and he has not committed any offence in any manner. At the time of filing a charge-sheet, the applicant has filed an application before the trial Court. It is argued that subsequently an offence under Section 409 of IPC has been added. The notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. has been issued to the applicant and he has co-operated in the investigation. As the applicant has co-operated in the investigation in pursuance to the notice issued under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C.
Signature Not VerifiedSAN there is no requirement of taking the applicant in custody. Applicant is a first Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.02.15 11:03:33 IST offender and prays for grant of anticipatory bail. He has placed reliance upon the 2 judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau Of Investigation S.L.P (Criminal) No.5191/2021 decided on 07.10.2021 wherein, Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the category and types of offences and also placed reliance upon the judgment passed in the case of Siddharth vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.838/2021), (2021 SCC Online SC 615). He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. On these grounds, he prays for granting of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
P er contra, counsel appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the application but he could not dispute the fact that the notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. has been issued to the applicant and he has co-operated in the investigation. Applicant being the first offender is also not disputed by the state counsel.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this application for grant of anticipatory bail subject to verification of the fact that the applicant is the first offender. In the event of arrest, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a surety bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one local solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer.
The applicant is directed to mark his presence before the concerning Police S t a t io n in first week of every month and is directed to cooperate in investigation. In case of failure to cooperate, the bail granted by this Court shall stand rejected automatically.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant/s will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;Signature Not Verified
2. The applicant/s will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR be;JHARIYA Date: 2022.02.15 11:03:33 IST
3 . The applicant/s will not indulge himself/themselves in extending 3 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them/her/him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant/s shall not involve any other offence, in case the applicant/s indulge in any other criminal case the benefit of bail as extended by this Court shall automatically cancelled.
5. The applicant/s will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The applicant/s will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. The applicant/s will inform the concerned S.H.O. of concerned Police Station about his residential address in the said area and it would be the duty of the Public Prosecutor to send E-copy of this order to SHO of concerned police station as well as Superintendent of Police concerned who shall inform the concerned SHO regarding the same.
Application stands allowed and disposed of.
E-copy of this order be provided to the applicant and E-copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance. It is made clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for practical purposes in respect of this order.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2022.02.15 11:03:33 IST