Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ambika Katare vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 April, 2022
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA
ON THE 25th OF APRIL, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 20725 of 2022
Between:-
AMBIKA KATARE S/O RAMYASH KATARE , AGED
ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE 79
JYOTI NAGAR THATIPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI ABHISHEK PARASHAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION PS THATIPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. CRIME INVESTIGATION BUREAU (CID) THROUGH
ITS INVESTIGATION OFFICER BHOPAL BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AVNEES SINGH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE)
This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The applicant has filed this first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.388/2017 registered at Police Station Thatipur, District Gwalior (M.P.) in relation to the offence punishable under Sections 306, 120-B, 342, 330, 466, 471, 201, 302 of the IPC.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant- Ambika Katare that the applicant is a public servant and he is working in Police Department. The applicant is innocent. He has not committed any offence rather, he has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the deceased has committed suicide and he was a habitual offender against whom eight criminal cases have been registered including offence under Section 11/13 of the 2 MPDVPK Act. On the alleged date of incident, during travelling deceased Shivam fled away with handcuff from the custody of police and thereafter, he committed suicide in the house of one Mahendra who was his friend. It is further submitted that in the present case, later on, a CID investigation was conducted by which the CID has drawn a conclusion that offence under Section 302 of the IPC is not made out against the applicant, hence, charge sheet has to be filed for commission of offence under Section 306 of IPC. It is further submitted that the applicant has already faced a departmental enquiry and his one increment has been withheld. No case is made out against the applicant under Section 306 of IPC as no ingredients of Section 107 of IPC are attracted. It is further submitted that co-accused Devendra Mishra has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12/04/2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No.17925/2022 and the case of present applicant is on same footing. Trial will take its own time. The applicant is ready to abide by any condition which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the application and has submitted that initially the complainant, who is the father of the deceased, filed one application under Section 156(3) of CrPC on account of that the concerned Magistrate after applying its judicial mind has taken cognizance and directed the police to register a case under Sections 302, 306 and 120-B of IPC. It is further submitted that eight ante mortem injuries were found over the body of the deceased and the injures found are still unexplained. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail then it will affect the society. Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts along with nature and gravity of offence, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties coupled with the fact that co-accused Devendra Mishra has already been 3 granted anticipatory bail by this Court, in the interest of justice, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following stringent conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of trial Court/ Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
This anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in above terms. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for information. Certified copy/ e-copy as per rules/directions.
(RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA) JUDGE Shubhankar Digitally signed by SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Date: 2022.04.25 17:21:24 +05'30'