Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gabul @ Karan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 July, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA No.4895/2018
Jabalpur,
Dated:30.07.2018
Shri Anoop Saxena, learned counsel for the appellants.
Shri R.S. Shukla, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent
No.1/State.
None for the respondent no.2/victim.
This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the Special Judge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, District Chhatarpur (M.P.) in special bail application No.341/18 whereby the application filed by the appellants under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
The appellants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.322/2018 registered at Police Station - Nougaon, District Chhatarpur (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323 & 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1)(X) & 3(1)(r,s) of the SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The allegation against the appellants is that on the date of incident, a dispute has arisen while complainant was using Hand Pump which was situated at the land of the appellants. Subsequently, the FIR has been registered.
It is submitted that the appellants are innocent. They have been falsely implicated in this case. There is no material to establish the offence. Hence, this appeal be allowed by setting-aside the impugned order and appellants be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposing the submissions made on behalf of the appellants has prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail and also stated that in view of the averments in the 2 FIR and other evidence collected during investigation, all the ingredients are established and disclosing commission of offence punishable under Section SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Hence, the appeal be disallowed.
Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, in view of this court, prima facie it is established that the appellants have committed the aforesaid crime. Hence, in view of provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, they are not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer is rejected.
Learned counsel has also submitted that the concerning Police officer be directed to observe and record the reason necessary for the arrest of the appellants as per the direction of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra and another passed in Criminal Appeal No.416/2018 decided on 20.3.2018 and by this Court in Ajeet Jain vs. State of M.P. passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1757/2018 decided on 4.4.2018, so that the appellants may not be harassed by unnecessary arrest. The prayer seems to be reasonable. As prima facie looking to the nature of the offence, the appellants' arrest is not warranted. Hence, in case of their arrest by the competent authority, it is expected from the Police officers concerned to observe the guidelines and directions given by the Apex court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra and another passed in Criminal Appeal No.416/2018 decided on 20.3.2018 and by this Court in Ajeet Jain vs. State of M.P. passed in Criminal Appeal No.1757/2018 decided on 4.4.2018.
C.C. as per rules.
(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge Digitally signed by VARSHA CHOURASIYA Date: 2018.08.02 15:32:05 +05'30' 3 vc