Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhushan Pathak vs State Of M.P. on 22 November, 2017
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-3984-2017
(BHUSHAN PATHAK Vs STATE OF M.P.)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 22-11-2017
Mr. Anand Mohan Khare, learned Counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Narendra Chourasiya, learned Deputy Government
Advocate for the respondent/State.
This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.7/2017 for offences punishable under sections 341, 294, 323, 506 of I.P.C and also under Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST Act registered at Police Station-AJK, Burhanpur, District- Burhanpur (M.P).
The arrest of the appellant is wanted in the aforesaid case. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant after finishing his education had taken the job of a teacher in a Government College at Burhanpur. He further states that the appellant was an activist nature and used to fight against instances of corruption in the administration and, therefore, had addressed letters to the Collector of Burhanpur in relation to irregularities and corrupt activities in the execution of the MANREGA Schemes related to Burhanpur. Annexure-A/4 is a similar representation made to the Commissioner, Indore Division. Thereafter, on 17/11/2016, another complaint was made to the Collector Burhanpur against the Sarpanch Secretary, the Employment Assistant of Gram Panchayat Baroda and also against the Assistant Engineer of Janpat Panchayat Burhanpur in relation to corrupt activities in execution of MANREGA Schemes and for enquiry of the same.
Learned counsel for the appellant thereafter states that as no action was being taken, one of the associates of the appellant Gopal Sonware is stated to have filed a writ petition before this Court for the registration of an offence in the said case. The case was disposed of by this Court with the liberty being given to the petitioner to prefer a complaint case before the Magistrate. Thereafter, upon a complaint case being filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Burhanpur, an order was made under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C for the registration of an F.I.R, pursuant to which, Police Station Lalbagh, District- Burhanpur registered an F.I.R being Crime No.8/2017 on 03/01/2017 under Sections 420, 406, 409, 120-B and 34 of I.P.C against one Govind Sonwane and Santosh Mahajan. The case is still under investigation and a charge sheet has not been filed. As no further action was being taken by the Police post registration of the F.I.R, the appellant and several other persons decided to hold a tonsuring ceremony as a mark of protest on 12/07/2017 at 9:30 A.M. The said mark of protest was on account of inaction of the District Administration, who according to the appellant was dragging its feet in the investigation and was not wanting to pursue the case against the suspects. However, two days before the date fixed for the tonsuring ceremony, the appellant herein and others appeared to have got a hint of a false case being registered against them under the provisions of the SC/ST Act and therefore, on 10/07/2017 at 4:40 P.M preferred a written complaint to the Thana In-Charge of Police Station of SC/ST Burhanpur stating that they have reasonable cause to suspect that a false case under the Provisions of SC/ST Act would be registered against the appellant and others for having taken of the issue of corruption. The said document is signed by the appellant and one another. The very next date i.e. 11/07/2017, the present F.I.R against the appellant is registered under the provisions of I.P.C which are all bailable and under the provisions of SC/ST Act which are non-bailable. However, it appears prima facie that in order to implicate the appellants, the F.I.R, though dated 11/07/2017 registered at 1:06 P.M, described an incident which is stated to have taken place on 10/07/2017 between 9:00 and 10:00 A.M whereby the appellant herein is stated to have blocked the way of the complainant Vimal Bai on a motor cycle hurled abuses at her, called her caste based names and beat her. There is no reason given in the F.I.R for the delay of over 24 hours in registering the said F.I.R. The witnesses to the said incident are one Praveen Choudhary and Vasanta Bhaskar. Interestingly, the complainant Vimal Bai is the wife of the person, who has been arrayed as a suspect by the Police in the F.I.R registered by the appellant being Crime No.8/2017 dated 03/01/2017. One of the witnesses Praveen Choudhary is the son of Sumitra Bai, who has been named as one of the suspects involved in the in- corrupt activities by the appellant herein in the representation dated 17/11/2016 made to the Collector Burhnapur.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the relevant timeline, a strong suspicion is raised that the F.I.R has been registered prima facie with the motive of cowing down the appellant and the other persons, who are raising their voice against corruption in Burhanpur, I am inclined to allow the instant appeal for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the appellant. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the appellant herein shall be enlarged on bail by the Arresting Officer upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer competent to arrest him. The appeal is finally disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE julie