Anand Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 January, 2023

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anand Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 January, 2023

Bench: Sanjay Dwivedi

                                   1
 IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       AT JABALPUR
                           BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
                     ON THE 24 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 1919 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
ANAND PATEL S/O LATE SHRI BHARAT PRASAD, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GROCER R/O VILLAGE
BARODA (HADA) TEHSIL AND POLICE STATION PATAN
DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               .....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI M. SHAFIQUALLAH - ADVOCATE)

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION GOHALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI ALOK AGNIHOTRI - DEPUTY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
(RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT - BY SHRI J.L. SONI - ADVOCATE)

      This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                    ORDER

This is the first application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.528/2022 registered at Police Station Gohalpur, District Jabalpur, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 473, 482 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 102, 103 of the Trade Marks Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in pursuance to a notice issued by the prosecution under Section 41-A of the CrPC, the applicant is 2 cooperating with the investigation. He submits that since the offence under Section 473 of the IPC is a non-bailable offence, therefore, the applicant is apprehending that if he appears before the Court and move an application for grant of bail then the same shall be rejected and he shall be sent to jail.

On the other hand, learned Deputy Government Advocate has opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail and submitted that only on presumption, the applicant is not entitled to get the protection of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant has also opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail and submitted that the applicant and main accused were found involved in manufacturing and selling tobacco in the name and trademark of the complainant and as such, he is not entitled to get the protection of anticipatory bail.

Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties; perusal of case diary; the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and the investigating agency has issued a notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC to the applicant, I am disposing of this application directing the applicant to move an appropriate application before the trial Court for grant of bail and on the same being done, the trial Court shall consider the applicant's application in accordance with law taking note of the fact that investigating agency has already issued a notice under Section 41-A of the CrPC to the applicant and pursuant thereto, he is providing cooperation in the investigation so as to get it concluded.

With the aforesaid, this application is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE Devashish DEVASHISH MISHRA 2023.01.25 10:32:41 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court