Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramkumar Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 February, 2019
1 MCRC-1835-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-1835-2019
(RAMKUMAR UPADHYAY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 06-02-2019
Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Ramji Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the respondent no.1/State.
Shri Phool Chand Paliwal, Advocate for respondent no.2. This is first bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Ramkumar Upadhyay (herein-after referred to as applicant) is apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 849/2018, registered at Police Station- Pali, District Umariya ((M.P.) for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.
Respondent no.2 filed a complaint against the applicant alleging that the applicant has conspired with the other co-accused, prepared a forged order by which application filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 250 of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 has been dismissed. Previously it was allowed. On the basis of the complaint, learned JMFC Court, Pali registered a complaint case being numbered as 849/2018 against the applicant and issued a notice for appearance of applicant under Section 204 of the Cr.P.C. In that application apprehending his arrest as well as he may be sent to the jail by the learned trial Court, he filed this application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for seeking the anticipatory bail.
Learned Panel Lawyer has submitted that the case has not been registered in the police station, Pali, Umariya or anywhere.
Respondent no.2 being a complainant in the lower Court submitted that the applicant and other co-accused committed conspiracy and prepared a forged order on that basis he was denied for the right of the possession. This is prima facie strong case for that respondent No.2 prays for dismissal of the application.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD TABISH KHAN Date: 07/02/2019 10:41:42 2 MCRC-1835-2019 document filed along with this application. It is undisputed that there is a dispute of the land between the family, one of the family member is an accused in the complaint. In complaint, son of his real sister, mother of the complainant filed an application under Section 250 of the MPLRC before the Nayab Tehsildar who is erred as an accused in the complaint, stating that he is the owner of the land mentioned in the petition but Ram Kumar Upadhyay is cultivating on the some portion of the land, who is not the owner of the land and prayed to dispossess him. As per the respondent, Nayab Tehsildar- Bhavna Dehariya allowed the application filed by Kamla Devi, mother of the complainant in order to dispossession, but Ram Kumar Upadhyay later on collide with Nayab Tehsildar and Mridul Sharma, Assistant Grade-3 changed that order and preferred a forged order of dismissal of the application filed by the Kamla Devi under Section 340 of the MPLRC.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants are not needed for the interrogation, the application filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall appear before the Court concerned where a criminal case is pending on or before 26.02.2019. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal b o nd i n the s um o f Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and furnishing one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority/Trial Court.
H e s hall further abide b y t h e other conditions enumerated in sub- section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
I f the applicant does no t appear before the Court concerned on or before 26.02.2019 the order passed by this Court shall stand cancelled.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHNU PRATAP SINGH CHAUHAN) JUDGE Tabish Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD TABISH KHAN Date: 07/02/2019 10:41:42